Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Each person has a personal relationship with god, and if they decide not to, that is a personal decision
Most christians I have met do not have an open mind about anything. Their focus is on what a BOOK says. A book written by man, for man. A book translated so many times no telling how many were warped to suit the political agendas of that day and time. A book missing many chapters and gospels because of the same political agendas. A book. Ignore the kindness and love Jesus came to preach. Ignore what he said. Stay with THE BOOK. Y'all worship that thing like the hebrews worshipped the golden calf while moses was getting some laws. But that story is from THE BOOK as well so how do we know the real facts? FAITH. And mine is very very different from most christians. Unless they are as open as I am to think 'what if" and question God and Jesus both but never act opposite of what Jesus taught.
Ok... Like I said To Bodecea... I understand your angst. But... why are you throwing me(not that I personally care) in with the people you are angry at? Look at my posts..
I believe VERY MUCH in what he said. The things that mean the most to me is "judge not, lest ye be judged". Do not tell your brother about the mote in their eye, without first removing the log from your own... let those without sin, cast the first stone, and finally.... love one another.
Those are four verses dedicated DIRECTLY towards not condemning your fellow man... right from Jesus' mouth... right from the New Testament. I challenge any fundamental Christian to find four examples in the New Testament that condemn Homosexuals, or any other type of sinner that can't be counteracted by those four examples of Christ's actual views.
Gosh. And I thought I was the dramatic one around here.
Angst? What angst? I think you are self projecting here. I responded to your question with my opinion. No angst. Just a response.
Regarding your comment about condeming one's fellow man....those who continue to call homosexuals SINNERS is what? Baby talk?
Most christians I have met do not have an open mind about anything. Their focus is on what a BOOK says. A book written by man, for man. A book translated so many times no telling how many were warped to suit the political agendas of that day and time. A book missing many chapters and gospels because of the same political agendas. A book. Ignore the kindness and love Jesus came to preach. Ignore what he said. Stay with THE BOOK. Y'all worship that thing like the hebrews worshipped the golden calf while moses was getting some laws. But that story is from THE BOOK as well so how do we know the real facts? FAITH. And mine is very very different from most christians. Unless they are as open as I am to think 'what if" and question God and Jesus both but never act opposite of what Jesus taught.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, wrong as it may be. The point is, you don't (I think) feel compelled to seek Christians out in order to jeer at, point fingers, and practice your immature and uneducated opinions of the origin of life, and man, and the nature of the universe...which you believe is a superior view because it includes a lack of belief in Christ.
And one of the things that baffles me about people who feel compelled to attack the bible and Christians...why do they think we are in a competition with them in regards to behavior? I do not expect non believers to act in the same way as Christians, nor does it matter to me when they don't. Whether or not the people I meet are good people or good Christians has nothing to do with my own faith. Each person has a personal relationship with god, and if they decide not to, that is a personal decision also and while I would like to see everybody in heaven, I respect their desire to believe what they believe.
Also when I hear someone (generally a non believer) say that people aren't good Christians, or that they are *just as good* as christians, I wonder, how do they know that?
A Christian does not judge another's relationship (or non) with god. Neither do they expect anybody to achieve perfection in terms of goodness.
So why do non-believers always say "My satan worshipping/atheist/mud puppy friends is a MUCH better Christian than any real Christian in the whole wide world"?
Was this addressed to me?
You are of course entitled to your opinion, wrong as it may be. The point is, you don't (I think) feel compelled to seek Christians out in order to jeer at, point fingers, and practice your immature and uneducated opinions of the origin of life, and man, and the nature of the universe...which you believe is a superior view because it includes a lack of belief in Christ.
And one of the things that baffles me about people who feel compelled to attack the bible and Christians...why do they think we are in a competition with them in regards to behavior? I do not expect non believers to act in the same way as Christians, nor does it matter to me when they don't. Whether or not the people I meet are good people or good Christians has nothing to do with my own faith. Each person has a personal relationship with god, and if they decide not to, that is a personal decision also and while I would like to see everybody in heaven, I respect their desire to believe what they believe.
Also when I hear someone (generally a non believer) say that people aren't good Christians, or that they are *just as good* as christians, I wonder, how do they know that?
A Christian does not judge another's relationship (or non) with god. Neither do they expect anybody to achieve perfection in terms of goodness.
So why do non-believers always say "My satan worshipping/atheist/mud puppy friends is a MUCH better Christian than any real Christian in the whole wide world"?
Each person has a personal relationship with god, and if they decide not to, that is a personal decision
No, everyone doesnt have a personal relationship with god; one cant make a decision to have a personal relationship or not with something that doesnt exist. This is an example of the presumptive arrogance typical of many Christians.
Yes... I know this is about why. But what I am trying to explain is that while I understand the why, you also have to realize that even Christians are ever learning, ever evolving in their faith.
Let's take a look at the word "Faith" for a second. Let me ask... would a person of "faith" demand punishment or persecution of people that they consider "sinners" in this lifetime, when there is a God that is very capable of meting out that punishment in the next?
I have to ask.... where is their faith?
Most christians I have met do not have an open mind about anything. Their focus is on what a BOOK says. A book written by man, for man. A book translated so many times no telling how many were warped to suit the political agendas of that day and time. A book missing many chapters and gospels because of the same political agendas. A book. Ignore the kindness and love Jesus came to preach. Ignore what he said. Stay with THE BOOK. Y'all worship that thing like the hebrews worshipped the golden calf while moses was getting some laws. But that story is from THE BOOK as well so how do we know the real facts? FAITH. And mine is very very different from most christians. Unless they are as open as I am to think 'what if" and question God and Jesus both but never act opposite of what Jesus taught.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, wrong as it may be. The point is, you don't (I think) feel compelled to seek Christians out in order to jeer at, point fingers, and practice your immature and uneducated opinions of the origin of life, and man, and the nature of the universe...which you believe is a superior view because it includes a lack of belief in Christ.
And one of the things that baffles me about people who feel compelled to attack the bible and Christians...why do they think we are in a competition with them in regards to behavior? I do not expect non believers to act in the same way as Christians, nor does it matter to me when they don't. Whether or not the people I meet are good people or good Christians has nothing to do with my own faith. Each person has a personal relationship with god, and if they decide not to, that is a personal decision also and while I would like to see everybody in heaven, I respect their desire to believe what they believe.
Also when I hear someone (generally a non believer) say that people aren't good Christians, or that they are *just as good* as christians, I wonder, how do they know that?
A Christian does not judge another's relationship (or non) with god. Neither do they expect anybody to achieve perfection in terms of goodness.
So why do non-believers always say "My satan worshipping/atheist/mud puppy friends is a MUCH better Christian than any real Christian in the whole wide world"?
And one of the things that baffles me about people who feel compelled to attack the bible and Christians...why do they think we are in a competition with them in regards to behavior? I do not expect non believers to act in the same way as Christians, nor does it matter to me when they don't.
So what was dumbshit saying about everybody who understood science understands that the bible has been disproven?
Sigh. The bible says this. The bible says that. God fearing. Lake of eternal fire. Damnation. Where is the love Jesus taught? Oh. wait. I know. Forgotten. Dismissed.
Yeah and when Jesus returns he will be leading an army of war?
Hardly a loving help the sick and children forgive his tresspassers kind of guy?
Heaven must do horrible things to you?
Oh. Never mind. FORUM. Duh.
But.....(and you knew that was coming)...this topic is about WHY. Ain't it?
Yes... I know this is about why. But what I am trying to explain is that while I understand the why, you also have to realize that even Christians are ever learning, ever evolving in their faith.
Let's take a look at the word "Faith" for a second. Let me ask... would a person of "faith" demand punishment or persecution of people that they consider "sinners" in this lifetime, when there is a God that is very capable of meting out that punishment in the next?
I have to ask.... where is their faith?
Most christians I have met do not have an open mind about anything. Their focus is on what a BOOK says. A book written by man, for man. A book translated so many times no telling how many were warped to suit the political agendas of that day and time. A book missing many chapters and gospels because of the same political agendas. A book. Ignore the kindness and love Jesus came to preach. Ignore what he said. Stay with THE BOOK. Y'all worship that thing like the hebrews worshipped the golden calf while moses was getting some laws. But that story is from THE BOOK as well so how do we know the real facts? FAITH. And mine is very very different from most christians. Unless they are as open as I am to think 'what if" and question God and Jesus both but never act opposite of what Jesus taught.
Sigh. The bible says this. The bible says that. God fearing. Lake of eternal fire. Damnation. Where is the love Jesus taught? Oh. wait. I know. Forgotten. Dismissed.
Yeah and when Jesus returns he will be leading an army of war?
Hardly a loving help the sick and children forgive his tresspassers kind of guy?
Heaven must do horrible things to you?
He needs an army to destroy all the wicked that is on the earth.
You already quoted that! Natural Selection doesnt work in the way you describe. Natural selection has nothing to do with weeding out bad genes like some sort of magic trick. Its how life responds to the environment. If the environment changes the segment of the gene pool best equipped to handle that change will survive and flourish better than others.
Example: Nearly every cell in every living organism needs oxygen for a biological process called cellular respiration, it is the metabolic process of a single cell. The first animals gathered oxygen from the water through their gills. Once plants had diversified enough, and the atmosphere had sufficient levels of oxygen via photosynthesis, animals gradually migrated to land because the availability of free oxygen allows the organism to expend less energy gathering it for cellular respiration.
Finally,someone attempted an answer to this.
Wrong, when you breed you breed out information not in information so by breeding out information the gene pool gets smaller and smaller until the information from all the other dog's needed to make a boxer that is all the information that is left,information to make a boxer.
Over time bad genes can be eliminated from a bloodline because the strong survive. It get's weeded out,a mutation cannot take over a gene pool ,if that was the case we would be deformed,stricken with disease,or dead because all the harmful mutations that exist.
No, a bad mutation cannot take over the gene pool. Natural selection is the process of good genes spreading throughout the population and the bad genes dying out. Why do you keep asserting that there are no good mutations. Its a ridiculous notion. Why is there a new flu vaccine each year if there are no beneficial mutations?
You dont breed out information, your making that up. Find me one place that says that. Information, in reference to DNA, means sequences nitrogenous base pairs. Deletion is indeed a mutation that results in loss of DNA. Insertion is a mutation that results in addition of DNA. Why are you only talking about one of them?
By what mechanism does information get lost? Please inform me.
Ive told you this before, panda bears eat meat as well.
Well their main diet is bamboo so why do they still need those rippers ?
For the meat.....
Each person has a personal relationship with god, and if they decide not to, that is a personal decision
No, everyone doesnt have a personal relationship with god; one cant make a decision to have a personal relationship or not with something that doesnt exist. This is an example of the presumptive arrogance typical of many Christians.
A "personal Relationship" is Really just a nice way of saying that we all believe a little differently than another. Presumed Arrogance? Not at all..
You have a personal relationship with the "nothingness" you embrace... unless are you telling me that all agnostics and atheists have the same philosophies. Which I highly doubt.
Would you like proof of the transititon from gills to lung? Or fish to Amphibian? Ok.
Lungfish - Lungfish - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How about this?
Coelacanth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"According to genetic evidence the divergence of coelacanths, lungfish, and tetrapods is thought to have occurred 390 million years ago."[4]
Source: [4]:^ a b Johanson, Zerina, John A. Long, John A. Talent, Philippe Janvier, and James W. Warren. "Oldest Coelacanth, from the Early Devonian of Australia." Biology Letters 2.3 (2006): 443-46. Print.
You can even see the transition from gills to lung in a single organism. Tadpoles have gills, when they become frogs they have lungs. Frogs even have a primitive bronchial system. They "swallow air", because the amphibian respiratory system hasnt developed; or rather it did, and those amphibians in which it developed became reptiles, and then mammals.
oh no you didn't, Let me show you how reliable your wiki is.
Coelacanth:
the world's oldest fish?
Quick-read this article:
Evolutionary scientists used to think that amphibians evolved from a group of fishes that included the coelacanth, which was known only from fossils. But they dropped this idea when living coelacanths were found from 1938 showing no evidence of evolution from the oldest fossil coelacanths to the living examples.The evidence from the coelacanth is good evidence for creation, for it shows that DNA, the genetic code, has remained stable throughout time.
When a living coelacanth fish was found in 1938 it was hailed as the scientific sensation of the century. Until then, the coelacanth (pronounced SEE'-luh-canth) was known to science only from fossils. Scientists generally believed coelacanths had become extinct 60 or 70 million years ago. Since 1938 many more living coelacanths have been caught.
All coelacanths, living and fossil, are members of a group of fishes called Crossopterygians. It is this group that most evolutionists believe evolved into amphibians and all land vertebrates — including humans.
Before the discovery of living coelacanths (photo at left shows museum official Marjorie Courtenay-Latimer with the 1938 specimen), evolutionists assumed that the fish's internal organs would be “part way” evolving from those of ordinary fish to those of amphibians.
But the living coelacanths showed no evidence that their soft parts were starting to adapt for use on land. So it was conceded that the coelacanth was obviously not the ancestor of amphibians after all.
Did anything evolve?
So evolutionists looked for another type of fish that would fit their belief that fish evolved into the creatures that dwell both on land and in water — the amphibians. There was no strong evidence, but they decided that another member of the Crossopterygian group of fishes — the rhipidistian — might have evolved into an amphibian.
How did they decide that rhipidistian fishes could have evolved into amphibians? The idea grew out of their study of similarities in skeletons of rhipidistians and what they believe were “early” amphibians. But in reality there is a vast difference between rhipidistians and amphibians.
Using even the evolutionists' time scale, which some scientists dispute, the coelacanth is the same fish it supposedly was hundreds of millions of years ago. It is surely strange that the coelacanth could remain so stable all this time, both genetically and morphologically, while its cousin the rhipidistian was supposedly evolving the mind-boggling number of changes required to transform it eventually into a human.
The evidence from the coelacanth is good evidence for creation, for it shows that DNA, the genetic code, has remained stable throughout time. In other words, the coelacanth has reproduced after its kind just like the Bible's book of Genesis said fishes would!
Photo credits: Drawing of coelacanth by former FishBase artist Robbie Cada; photo of Marjorie Courtenay-Latimer with the mounted coelacanth in 1938, courtesy Goosens family website. (Hendrik Goosen was the fisherman from whose catch the 1938 coelacanth came).
Juvenile coelacanths filmed off Indonesia's Sulawesi Island on October 6, 2009:
Story from The Japan Times
Short video of young coelacanth
Coelacanth -- the fish that defied evolution
Where in the article did you find that?
I found none of what you claim in the wiki article. However i did find this: "According to genetic analysis, the divergence of coelacanths, lungfish, and tetrapods is thought to have occurred 390 million years ago.[4]"
Google Image Result for http://higheredbcs.wiley.com/legacy/college/levin/0471697435/chap_tut/images/nw0281-nn.jpg
Feel free to look up each of those species if you want
Eryops - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia << Amphibian ancestor.
Yeah and when Jesus returns he will be leading an army of war?
Hardly a loving help the sick and children forgive his tresspassers kind of guy?
Heaven must do horrible things to you?
He needs an army to destroy all the wicked that is on the earth.
Describe the "wicked"?
Is this another instance of God being hellbent on the murder of non-believers?
