Pascal's Wager, Biblical Contradition

[quankanne]

God is not a person. Worshipping a person is idolatry.

 

ummm, God actually became “the word Incarnate” and took on human form through Christ. If you remember the theology of the Trinity, there’s God the Father (God), God the Son (Jesus) and God the Spirit (the Holy Spirit). Kinda like water can be solid, liquid or gas, but it’s still water!

 

Incidentally, I'm not asking for you to speak for Moose; I just noticed that he posted his comments within a couple minutes of yours, assumed he hadn't seen yours, and wondered what he thought of the contrast.

 

I think Moose and I tend to tag-team when it comes to spirituality: He knows the Bible pretty well and can give example from it, but when it seems that the point is overlooked or misunderstood, I try to spit it out in a different way. And it makes me smile, when I think about it, a Protestant and a Catholic tag-teaming for Jesus when they're usually at loggerheads!

[quankanne]

God is not a person. Worshipping a person is idolatry.

 

ummm, God actually became “the word Incarnate” and took on human form through Christ. If you remember the theology of the Trinity, there’s God the Father (God), God the Son (Jesus) and God the Spirit (the Holy Spirit). Kinda like water can be solid, liquid or gas, but it’s still H20!

 

Incidentally, I'm not asking for you to speak for Moose; I just noticed that he posted his comments within a couple minutes of yours, assumed he hadn't seen yours, and wondered what he thought of the contrast.

 

I think Moose and I tend to tag-team when it comes to spirituality: He knows the Bible pretty well and can give example from it, but when it seems that the point is overlooked or misunderstood, I try to spit it out in a different way. And it makes me smile, when I think about it, a Protestant and a Catholic tag-teaming for Jesus when they're usually at loggerheads!

[VIP]

ummm, God actually became “the word Incarnate” and took on human form through Christ.

 

Everybody is a spirit incarnated, and we are all divine.

 

If you remember the theology of the Trinity, there’s God the Father (God), God the Son (Jesus) and God the Spirit (the Holy Spirit).

 

There is no Trinity. There is a spirit that manifests itself in different forms. But whatever are the forms, they are all coming from ONE source.

[Green]

you know you cant fully understand god, I mean people try to say well if god is good then why do bad things happen, and how can god be good if bad things happen... well how can god be in infinite places at the same time.... how can god have existed forever,, longer then forever.... how can god know everything even stuff that doesnt exist..... who knows god does.... god could answer these questions but its a pain in my butt to think about... The truth is I find it hard to rationalize god but I just cant stop believing i can feel my soul or something and the though of just disapearing into nothing ness after death seems imposblible, yes god is a contradiction of everything,... exists always, is everywher, can do anything even the imposbible like make 1+1=5 and it would be right

[nittygritty]

Aristotle believed that humans had spirits (or "soul") but did not believe that they exist beyond death. Read "On The Soul."

 

The quality that we have that makes us each individually us, the part of being human that actually experiences things can be called the soul, or spirit. Not all cultures see such things as a duality, either.

 

Just as your body grows, your experiene and how you interpret things grows, too. I don't see why a belief in magic has anything to do with it.

 

The Human Spirit can't be seen or measured, so how do you know it exists? How does it make us individually us? How can a soul or spirit experience things?

 

For instance, two identical sets of twins raised by their biological parents, How would one grow up to believe in God and the other grow up to be an Athiest? Is spiritual growth what makes the difference?

[Jinnah]

 

 

And sticking out your tongue at then end of an otherwise straightforward answer is not sarcastic? I apologize for my own sarcasm - my question was genuine, albeit encased within a slightly sour wrapping. It was unconscious, but I admit, wholly unwarranted.

 

So who speaks for the "ignorant?" If you don't know Christ, are you eternally separated, as it is written in Moose's gospel, or is there hope for the ignorant, according to the catechism of the Catholic church? Does the Pope have the final word on all of this?

 

Incidentally, I appreciate you guys - Moose, Jinnah, and JamesM especially - for the information in this discussion. I know that your beliefs are heartfelt, genuine, and deep, and I appreciate your sharing them.

 

Lol, I was doing the "sticking out the tongue" face to lighten the mood. I would think if someone truly hasn't heard about Jesus, God would have mercy on them, but they would still have to live a moral life first.

 

I have to admit that catechism of the Catholic Church is something I tend to believe.

[nittygritty]

What about the human spirit of conjoined twin? These twins clearly have different interests and personalities. They are uniquely two individuals sharing one body. If it is the human spirit that makes them individually unique, how did their human spirit get there? Why would they not be identical in every way?

 

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/351485/conjoined_twins/

[disgracian]

So, when we read the Bible, we see many rules for masters and slaves. These are there to protect the slaves from mistreatment. I could go into detail as to what they are, but I suggest that a good commentary of the Bible could help you find such verses.

Just thought I'd remind you of Exodus 21:20-21 - "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."

 

You were saying that Biblical slavery was nothing like the chatel slavery in the US? We also must be using very different definitions of mistreatment. Being able to legally brutalise, purchase and exploit as cheap labour, as well as keeping their children makes this an interesting juxtaposition with your next statement...

And when we read many verses in the Bible, they indicate that God sees everyone as equals. He does not put slaves in a lower class.

The idea that God approves of slavery is false. In fact, as you would see, anyone selling someone into slavery is punishable by up to death.

Yet it has no qualms with buying slaves, and (provided they are not Jews) beating them so severely that they can't get up for days.

 

Cheers,

D.

[quankanne]

dang, how did manage to triple post on one correction? sorry 'bout that ...

 

Everybody is a spirit incarnated, and we are all divine.

 

yes, we are all incarnations, but Jesus is the Word of God incarnate. Meaning Christians believe he's God in human flesh and form, like us in every way except for the sinfulness part.

 

Only in the sense that we are created in God's image, and he is divine … our human nature with it's gift of free will allows us to enact on that divinity or on sinfulness. So we're not completely divine or sinful ...

 

There is no Trinity. There is a spirit that manifests itself in different forms. But whatever are the forms, they are all coming from ONE source.

 

"God is like a shamrock …" :D

[VIP]

What about the human spirit of conjoined twin? These twins clearly have different interests and personalities. They are uniquely two individuals sharing one body. If it is the human spirit that makes them individually unique, how did their human spirit get there? Why would they not be identical in every way?

 

There must have been causes, before their birth, to make them born this way and those were their past actions.

[Moai]

The Human Spirit can't be seen or measured, so how do you know it exists?

 

That depends on how you want to define "spirit." If by spirit you mean the mind, and the experience of thinking and experiencing things then it is self-evident. I cannot experience YOUR spirit directly, but I can experience mine, and because I have one, and am human, and you are human, I can infer that you have one, too.

 

If you define "spirit" as a soul that lives on after death there is no evidence that such a thing exists.

 

How does it make us individually us? How can a soul or spirit experience things?

 

Every mind is different, even those in indential twins. And the spirit is in a body that has senses. Those senses are imperfect, of course, which also means that we experience reality imperfectly, but we can get pretty darn close to it. That is why sience is so valuable.

 

For instance, two identical sets of twins raised by their biological parents, How would one grow up to believe in God and the other grow up to be an Athiest? Is spiritual growth what makes the difference?

 

No, one accepts fallacious reasoning and the other doesn't. One accepts things on evidence, and one does not. Just because the twins are identical genetially it does not follow that all their experiences are idential.

 

How can one twin get shiophrenia and the other not? Believe or not, science is addressing this issue and others like it.

 

What about the human spirit of conjoined twin? These twins clearly have different interests and personalities. They are uniquely two individuals sharing one body. If it is the human spirit that makes them individually unique, how did their human spirit get there? Why would they not be identical in every way?

 

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/351485/conjoined_twins/

 

Because they have individual brains. Simple.

[Moai]

There must have been causes, before their birth, to make them born this way and those were their past actions.

 

Why?

 

What you are suggesting is that Paris Hilton was so good in a previous life that she got the privilege to be born as an heiress who never has to work. Conversely, you suggest that every child now starving did something horrific in a past life and is now starving because of it.

 

The fact is that there is no reason for any of this, save human indifference in many cases.

[Moai]

you know you cant fully understand god,

 

And yet people behave as if they know what god wants.

 

I mean people try to say well if god is good then why do bad things happen, and how can god be good if bad things happen

 

Because their reasoning ability is hitting themin the face that god makes no sense.

 

... well how can god be in infinite places at the same time....

 

He/she/it can't.

 

how can god have existed forever,, longer then forever.

 

The better question is how is it that god could have always existed, but the Universe itself could not have. Believers suggest that everything has to have had a beginning, so god must have created everything, but when one suggests that such must be true of god they say god always existed. It's nonsense.

 

how can god know everything even stuff that doesnt exist

 

He can't because he doesn't exist.

 

who knows god does

 

Nope. As you say above, you can't understand god, so you have no way of knowing what he knows and what he doesn't.

 

god could answer these questions but its a pain in my butt to think about

 

No, he can't, becaues he doesn't exist. And that is why he doesn't. Simple. These questions you posit demonstrate this to be so.

 

The truth is I find it hard to rationalize god but I just cant stop believing i can feel my soul or something and the though of just disapearing into nothing ness after death seems imposblible, yes god is a contradiction of everything

 

Why can't you stop believing? What is so great about your belief that you can't abandon it, even though you say yourself there is no evidence for it--save feeling "something"? When you die, your brain turns off. That's it. I fail to see how that is impossible.

 

There was a time before you existed, and that doesn't seem strange, does it? Why does it seem impossible that you will return to that state?

 

exists always, is everywher, can do anything even the imposbible like make 1+1=5 and it would be right

 

Nope. If that were so, what we see around us would be impossible.

[nittygritty]

That depends on how you want to define "spirit." If by spirit you mean the mind, and the experience of thinking and experiencing things then it is self-evident. I cannot experience YOUR spirit directly, but I can experience mine, and because I have one, and am human, and you are human, I can infer that you have one, too.

 

If you define "spirit" as a soul that lives on after death there is no evidence that such a thing exists.

 

 

 

Every mind is different, even those in indential twins. And the spirit is in a body that has senses. Those senses are imperfect, of course, which also means that we experience reality imperfectly, but we can get pretty darn close to it. That is why sience is so valuable.

 

 

 

No, one accepts fallacious reasoning and the other doesn't. One accepts things on evidence, and one does not. Just because the twins are identical genetially it does not follow that all their experiences are idential.

 

How can one twin get shiophrenia and the other not? Believe or not, science is addressing this issue and others like it.

 

 

 

Because they have individual brains. Simple.

 

 

So your definition of the human spirit is the brain processing thought. Brain activity and sensory activity that is imperfect. Is that your perception of human spirit? Or am I still misunderstanding your meaning?

 

New studies have found that schizophrenia can also be caused from the use of certain illegal drugs like methamphetamine. Previously, schizophrenia was thought to be only found genetically and familially. Evidently there are many cases of drug induced schizophrenia with permanent, lifelong affliction with the disorder. I don't recall the name of the documentary I saw on this but it was a couple of years ago when I saw it, so I would imagine there is probably more recent information about it.

 

Scientifically it doesn't logically make sense to me that identical in DNA conjoined twins, whose brains are completely intact and who share the same experiences, would not be identical in every way. I guess my question would be why and how would their brains be programmed differently? Again, are you saying that its because their human spirit makes their individual brains different? Or simply because they have individual brains? Because that answer seems illogical when their brains consist of identical DNA.

 

There must be a reason why identical conjoined twins with individual brains would process and experience things differently from each other?

[nittygritty]

Why can't you stop believing? What is so great about your belief that you can't abandon it, even though you say yourself there is no evidence for it--save feeling "something"? When you die, your brain turns off. That's it. I fail to see how that is impossible.

 

There was a time before you existed, and that doesn't seem strange, does it? Why does it seem impossible that you will return to that state?

 

 

Why can't you believe? If you can believe that the existence of life began from an explosion in the universe or that a cell is capable of evolving into a plant and a plant evolving into an animal and an animal evolving into a human, Why can't you believe that a human could evolve into another form and existence beyond death? Why can't you believe that there is a being higher than ourselves that created the universe and the creatures that inhabit it?

 

At some point, something created something. An atmosphere that consists of nothing doesn't just start a catalytic reaction to become something that eventually becomes a living cell does it?

 

You keep adamantly insisting that God doesn't exist as if you know it for fact. Your limiting your knowledge by closing off your mind to the possibility of God's existence. There are no scientific facts that prove that God does not exist, so why is it that you have closed your mind to that possibility?

[Enema]

1) Why can't you believe?

 

2) There are no scientific facts that prove that God does not exist, so why is it that you have closed your mind to that possibility?

 

Moai has been over these things a million times already. To save us some time, I will attempt to summarize the two most important for him:

 

1) There is no evidence to believe.

- It's not that he can't, it's that there is no reason to.

 

2) The burden of proof is on the person making a claim.

- You are making the claim "God exists". It is up to you to prove it.

- ie. If I said there was a giant green invisible monkey behind your shoulder, would it be up to you to prove there wasn't, or up to me to prove there was?

[nittygritty]

Moai has been over these things a million times already. To save us some time, I will attempt to summarize the two most important for him:

 

1) There is no evidence to believe.

- It's not that he can't, it's that there is no reason to.

 

2) The burden of proof is on the person making a claim.

- You are making the claim "God exists". It is up to you to prove it.

- ie. If I said there was a giant green invisible monkey behind your shoulder, would it be up to you to prove there wasn't, or up to me to prove there was?

 

 

So, he's an agnostic rather than an atheist. He just needs the proof.

 

When there are only a small percentage of people who don't believe in any God, I would think that the burden of proof would be on that small percent of non-believers.

[Moose]

I'm back! Had a blast--lots of comedy...

Glad you made it....one day maybe you can explain how you had comedy in the wilderness??

First, the evolution of consciene fits perfectly into current evolutionary theory.

Theory. Evolution is nothing but a theory. Our conscience is a gift from God, created by God. Nothing more, nothing less. We were created in God's, "image". God has a conscience, therefore, we do also. I believe evolution is a big fat joke. There are no fossil records that show verifiable transitions from one kind to another.....anywhere.

 

Darwin had an excuse since fossils were rare, but modern day scientists don't have that luxury, there are literally TONS of them, and still they have never, EVER found a legitimate transitions from one kind to another, and they never will.

So we who have the "cooperation gene" are selected for over those who don't.

And just who does the, "selecting"? Fate? AND.....if this were true, why are some people still born deaf, or blind, or lame, or deformed, or not even born at all? Wouldn't one think that if this theory were correct, the natural selective order of things would've gotten rid of these abnormalities.....no?

 

How would you explain the random, "chances" of these anomalies happening? (Hint: "random chance" doesn't explain it well enough for me)

The reason Western culture is so vibrant and even considers the concept of human rights is because of secularism and the DISMISSAL of religious morality.

Our country has ALWAYS had human rights, and they themselves have evolved and became more humane. I think what you actually mean is in THIS day and age, immoral human rights, or, "Toleration" is the source of what you define as, "vibrant".

 

I on the other hand define it as a one way road to ruin. Want to see an example? (not directed neccessarily to you Moai but to other interested parties), Read Revelation 18.

There is not one word in the Bible that says slavery is wrong.

1 Timothy 1:8-11 clearly puts slave traders in a catagory of the ungodly, sinful, unholy and irreligious.

In the US, the bloodiest war in our history was fought to force some of the most religious people our country has ever known to give UP slavery.

Considering the fact that slavery in the Old Testament was a way for some who had a debt, or even committed a crime would voluntarily sell themselves into slavery to relieve themselves of that debt.

 

Most of the time, this was done for a set length of time. More often than not, at the end of said time, they would VOLUNTARILY stay with their, "masters".....what does that tell you about, "slavery" in the Old Testament????

 

Contrary to what you might think, the VERY application of scriptural principles ultimately led to the liberation of slavery in America. Genesis 1:27; Acts 17:26-28; Galatians 3:28.

And now, women's rights. Is there one passage in ANY holy book that speaks to the equality of women?

I just gave you three.....what more do you want?

Paul, in the New Testement has some very misogynistic things to say on the subject--women shouldn't speak in church, etc

Here we go again......taking what Paul says out of context.....tsk...tsk....

 

You're referring to 1 Timothy 2:12-13 I'm assuming. Further study will show that In THAT culture, women were largely illiterate and unlearned. Paul is saying that UNTIL women can, "learn", she shouldn't be so apt to, "teach".

 

If he meant for them to always be silent, can you explain to me what he meant in 1 Corinthians 11? The whole chapter clearly puts man AND woman on even keel to learn and grow in submission to one another, and to God.

That being so, where did the idea of women's rights come from?

I've just made it clear that it comes from God. Everything......comes from God.

It came from people looking around and thinking about the subject without the veneer of religious tradition.

In other words, under our own power. Again, this is dangerous, and only leads to destruction as it's explained, CLEARLY in scripture. (Proverbs 3)

Where in the Bible does it say that it is wrong to sleep with my 12 year-old cousin?

How many do you want???!!! Tell you what....why not start in Leviticus? THE whole Chapter 18 practically?

Where is the advice on dealing with the elderly?

1 Peter 5:5

first: and then the Bible "morphs" to fit the concept then: the book remains unhanged.

Amen to that! (And a noted "arrow", in my quiver).

It is just that more of it is, and should be ignored.

Now THAT would be self destruction.....in my humble opinion of course....

But if animals do believe in god, it is a safe bet that their god looks like them.

Is this in regards to the, "Made in our Image" statement? Again....out of context....God wasn't talking about, "looks".....

Because as we understandmore of the world around us, god gets smaller and smaller and smaller.

Only in your world friend.....your world....

 

I don't know if anyone else has caught on to this, but you do seem to take no bones about using Scripture to disprove God's existance, yet everything in Scripture is from God....isn't that futile?

 

Now it's time that I took a break......more later......

[nittygritty]

Moai has been over these things a million times already. To save us some time, I will attempt to summarize the two most important for him:

 

1) There is no evidence to believe.

- It's not that he can't, it's that there is no reason to.

 

2) The burden of proof is on the person making a claim.

- You are making the claim "God exists". It is up to you to prove it.

- ie. If I said there was a giant green invisible monkey behind your shoulder, would it be up to you to prove there wasn't, or up to me to prove there was?

 

 

ie. If 85 percent of all people said that there was a giant green invisible monkey behind your shoulder, would you still keep choosing not to see it because you have invested a great deal of your time in life trying to prove and convince people that monkeys don't exist?

[Enema]

ie. If 85 percent of all people said that there was a giant green invisible monkey behind your shoulder, would you still keep choosing not to see it because you have invested a great deal of your time in life trying to prove and convince people that monkeys don't exist?

 

That is known as an "Argument ad populum" and is a ridiculous position to assume when trying to prove any point.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

[Moai]

So your definition of the human spirit is the brain processing thought. Brain activity and sensory activity that is imperfect. Is that your perception of human spirit? Or am I still misunderstanding your meaning?

 

I suppose that would do. That is the only thing that we can verify happening. So far.

 

New studies have found that schizophrenia can also be caused from the use of certain illegal drugs like methamphetamine. Previously, schizophrenia was thought to be only found genetically and familially. Evidently there are many cases of drug induced schizophrenia with permanent, lifelong affliction with the disorder. I don't recall the name of the documentary I saw on this but it was a couple of years ago when I saw it, so I would imagine there is probably more recent information about it.

 

I'm not sure what this has to do with our current discussion.

 

Scientifically it doesn't logically make sense to me that identical in DNA conjoined twins, whose brains are completely intact and who share the same experiences, would not be identical in every way.

 

Why doesn't it logically make sense to you? Conjoined twins do not necessarily have identical DNA, for one thing, and they cannot have identical experiences, by definition. Just becaue they are in the same place at the same time seeing the same thing it does not follow that they will interpret it identically.

 

I guess my question would be why and how would their brains be programmed differently? Again, are you saying that its because their human spirit makes their individual brains different? Or simply because they have individual brains? Because that answer seems illogical when their brains consist of identical DNA.

 

No offense, but I really don't think that you really DO wonder about these things. There is a great deal of research going on right now that addresses all of these things you deem "illogical" and goes a long way to explain it, yet you have availed yourself of none of it. Do you want me to give you a basic neuroscience lesson, or do you want to discuss the matter at hand? There are many better, more educated men in neuroscience who can do a much better job than I, why don't you read their stuff?

 

I recall another poster using the above at me regarding the Civil War, to score cheap rhetorical points, as if I know nothing of the subject--when in fact, I would wager I am better versed in same than he is. In this instance, I can tell by your questions that you have not made yourself aware of this work, or what any of it actually means. And that's cool, you don't have to read anything that you don't want, but your questions have been answered in those books and papers, which are readily available to you.

 

If you would like, read one, start a thread with your thoughts about it, and we'll discuss it. Until then, either post a chronicle of the Gospels that is linear and omits nothing, or ask some questions that are germane to the topic.

 

There must be a reason why identical conjoined twins with individual brains would process and experience things differently from each other?

 

There are. You should read about it and learn what they are.

[VIP]

He/she/it can't.

 

It is, because it's in everything and everybody.

 

The better question is how is it that god could have always existed, but the Universe itself could not have. Believers suggest that everything has to have had a beginning, so god must have created everything, but when one suggests that such must be true of god they say god always existed. It's nonsense.

 

Creation and the Creator are without beginning and without end.

 

When you die, your brain turns off. That's it. I fail to see how that is impossible.

 

You haven't experienced death in this lifetime, so how do you know what happens at that moment?

 

There was a time before you existed, and that doesn't seem strange, does it? Why does it seem impossible that you will return to that state?

 

We have been existing forever, time is as relative as the material world. In fact, there is no time without matter. The time is always "now".

[Moai]

Glad you made it....one day maybe you can explain how you had comedy in the wilderness??

 

Thanks! I went to a clampout, and Clampers are some of the funniest guys in the whole wide world. Great fun. Still a little hungover though!

 

Theory. Evolution is nothing but a theory.

 

Nope. Evolution is a fact. Why do you refuse to acknowledge this? Every reputable biology department on the planet knows this is the case, you an see it happening for yourself, but you refuse to acknowledge it. For the umpsteenth time: Evolution is a fact. We have a THEORY that explains the FACT we see.

 

We do not currently have a theory that explains gravity. Does that mean gravity doesn't exist, or that we are somehow guessing about it?

 

Our conscience is a gift from God, created by God. Nothing more, nothing less. We were created in God's, "image". God has a conscience, therefore, we do also. I believe evolution is a big fat joke. There are no fossil records that show verifiable transitions from one kind to another.....anywhere.

 

Well, for one thing, you yourself ar e a transitional form, and so is everyone you know. Also, kind is not a definition in use in any biology department I am aware of--save maybe Liberty Baptist College or something.

 

You can consider it a joke all you want, but it just make syou look foolish. And ignorant.

 

I know that you are a big fan of "Reasons to Believe" etc., so let's look at what a judge (appointed by Bush) has t say about ID etc., shall we?

 

"The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."

 

And:

 

"Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when consid ered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."{my bold}

 

Darwin had an excuse since fossils were rare, but modern day scientists don't have that luxury, there are literally TONS of them, and still they have never, EVER found a legitimate transitions from one kind to another, and they never will.

 

I agree, because kind doesn't mean anything. But as far as actual transitional fossils go, we have thousands. Wanna see?

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#pred4

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

 

Enjoy! You can also visit your closest natural history museuem and look at the actual fossils yourself, I am sure. Or, you can take an anthropology class and learn all about homininds. Or, you can shut your eyes, plug your ears and scream "IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT". Whatever makes you happy.

 

And just who does the, "selecting"? Fate? AND.....if this were true, why are some people still born deaf, or blind, or lame, or deformed, or not even born at all? Wouldn't one think that if this theory were correct, the natural selective order of things would've gotten rid of these abnormalities.....no?

 

No. All genes are subject to mutation. Not only that, because mediacl science has advanced so, maladies that were previously fatal are no minor, and allow those suffering from them to reproduce.

 

How would you explain the random, "chances" of these anomalies happening? (Hint: "random chance" doesn't explain it well enough for me)Our country has ALWAYS had human rights, and they themselves have evolved and became more humane. I think what you actually mean is in THIS day and age, immoral human rights, or, "Toleration" is the source of what you define as, "vibrant".

 

Really. I don't think black people or women would agree with you. And in the above, you suggest that people who agree with you and your definition of morality get protection under the law, but anyone not fitting that definition do not.

 

As far as "random" chance goes, evolution is not random. Chance is why organisms survive or not. Whichever is best suited to the environment will live to reproduce, and therefore pass their genetic material on to the next generation. And so on. It's actually really simple, and it explains all the diversity of life we see. No diety required.

 

I on the other hand define it as a one way road to ruin. Want to see an example? (not directed neccessarily to you Moai but to other interested parties), Read Revelation 18.1 Timothy 1:8-11 clearly puts slave traders in a catagory of the ungodly, sinful, unholy and irreligious.Considering the fact that slavery in the Old Testament was a way for some who had a debt, or even committed a crime would voluntarily sell themselves into slavery to relieve themselves of that debt.

 

Uh-huh. Nice that you have figured that out, too bad that all the slave traders who existed up until about 150 years ago (and the clergy who preached to them) didn't read it as you do.

 

Most of the time, this was done for a set length of time. More often than not, at the end of said time, they would VOLUNTARILY stay with their, "masters".....what does that tell you about, "slavery" in the Old Testament????

 

The Old Testement itself tells me it sucked. I'd like some references for these assertions, please.

 

Contrary to what you might think, the VERY application of scriptural principles ultimately led to the liberation of slavery in America. Genesis 1:27; Acts 17:26-28; Galatians 3:28.I just gave you three.....what more do you want?Here we go again......taking what Paul says out of context.....tsk...tsk....

 

Nope. Flat out, 100% wrong.

 

Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are Good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. -- 1 Peter 2: 18-20

 

[FONT=Arial]"[slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." Jefferson Davis, President, Confederate States of America [/FONT]

 

[FONT=Arial]"The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example."Rev. R. Furman, D.D., a Baptist pastor from South Carolina.[/FONT]

 

"The Christian church's main justification of the concept of slavery was based on the "curse of Ham" which appears in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) in Genesis 9:25-27.

"

Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers. He also said, 'Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem.

Christians at the time believed that Canaan had settled in Africa and that his descendents had become black.

Although slavery was widespread in Palestine during Jesus' ministry, the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) does not record his opinion of it. Slavery was casually mentioned without criticism in the various books of the [COLOR=#0000ff]Bible[/COLOR]. It was accepted as a natural part of life by almost all Christians until the 19th century [COLOR=#0000ff]CE[/COLOR]."

 

It is true that some fringe sects of Christianity opposed slavery, but they were in the minority of beleivers. It was SECULARISTS that made up the bulk of the abolitionist movement.

 

You're referring to 1 Timothy 2:12-13 I'm assuming. Further study will show that In THAT culture, women were largely illiterate and unlearned. Paul is saying that UNTIL women can, "learn", she shouldn't be so apt to, "teach".

 

Ok. The men were illiterate, too. Makes you wonder why you value books written by such primitive people in higher regard than you do modern science, but to each his own, I guess.

 

Oh, and why were the women illiterate? Hmmmm?

 

If he meant for them to always be silent, can you explain to me what he meant in 1 Corinthians 11? The whole chapter clearly puts man AND woman on even keel to learn and grow in submission to one another, and to God.I've just made it clear that it comes from God.

 

How come you read it that way, but for almost 2,000 years it meant the opposite?

Everything......comes from God.In other words, under our own power. Again, this is dangerous, and only leads to destruction as it's explained, CLEARLY in scripture. (Proverbs 3)How many do you want???!!! Tell you what....why not start in Leviticus? THE whole Chapter 18 practically?1 Peter 5:5Amen to that! (And a noted "arrow", in my quiver).Now THAT would be self destruction.....in my humble opinion of course....Is this in regards to the, "Made in our Image" statement? Again....out of context....God wasn't talking about, "looks".....Only in your world friend.....your world....

 

Really. Many Christians would disagree with you. But in point of fat, I don't think god is talking in the Bible at all, so I really don't care what it says. Great that you do, but your belief in the book is not indicative of the book's truth. Care to write out the Gospels for me? It should be easy, right?

 

I don't know if anyone else has caught on to this, but you do seem to take no bones about using Scripture to disprove God's existance, yet everything in Scripture is from God....isn't that futile?

 

Now it's time that I took a break......more later......

 

I don't use scripture to demonstrate that god doesn't exist, I use it to demonstrate that if there is one,he isn't described in the Bible. Or the Koran.

[VIP]

I've just made it clear that it comes from God. Everything......comes from God.

 

The idea of women's equality was necessary for economic reasons.

[sb129]

The idea of women's equality was necessary for economic reasons.

 

I see evidence of evolution on a daily basis. Its all around us. Its impossible to ignore. I can't wait to go to the NYC Natural History museum next month!

 

Nittygritty, Moai is definitely not agnostic.

Out of all the atheists I know, his argument for it is possibly the best researched and most articulate. And his individual circumstances make his argument even more credible.