MLD Woody Posted March 11, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 7 hours ago, Axe said: G'night Woody.. now you're just babbling. As you continued to not add anything to your argument... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 5 hours ago, jbluhm86 said: It does indeed. It also claimed that these were the effects of such things as witches and curses, and how people were put to death en mass because such beliefs. Kind of odd how witch burnings fell out of style once the germ theory of disease was discovered. One would think that an all-seeing God would've snuck that into his cannon to prevent thousands of his innocent followers from being put to death, but 🤷♂️ Is there any New Covenant verses to back that up? I am not speaking about what some people have wrongly done in the name of Christianity. Lots of people have done wrong things and try to use the bible to justify their actions. It seems to me that burning witches doesn't line up very well with loving your neighbor as yourself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 8 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said: Is there any New Covenant verses to back that up? I am not speaking about what some people have wrongly done in the name of Christianity. Lots of people have done wrong things and try to use the bible to justify their actions. It seems to me that burning witches doesn't line up very well with loving your neighbor as yourself. Or the Church instigated and sanctioned Crusades either. Burning witches is trivial in comparison.😱 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 6 hours ago, hoorta said: And we get the corona bologna because of it... We also got Jesus (Yeshua) because of it. Our choices seem to be the atheist view that out of nothing came creation. Or there is a creator God who created the universe but this God is not a personal God nor perfect (apparently) and created an imperfect world. Or the bible version that answers the questions but on its face seems too simplistic and not reasonable for some. With all the mocking of God speaking the universe into existence it still seems more easy for me to believe that than the alternatives. Science with the big bang theory of how the universe was created goes along pretty well with the bible saying God spoke the universe into being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 2 hours ago, TexasAg1969 said: Or the Church instigated and sanctioned Crusades either. Burning witches is trivial in comparison.😱 People have always tried to justify their evil actions. The Christian faith is unique in many ways but in one area we are the same with every other religion (or no religion at all) and that is some people will do evil and use Christianity to justify it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 8 hours ago, jbluhm86 said: It does indeed. It also claimed that these were the effects of such things as witches and curses, and how people were put to death en mass because such beliefs. Kind of odd how witch burnings fell out of style once the germ theory of disease was discovered. One would think that an all-seeing God would've snuck that into his cannon to prevent thousands of his innocent followers from being put to death, but 🤷♂️ look up "Angelic Conflict" in the Bible... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 13 hours ago, Axe said: You're welcome to take a rip at it yourself .. And keep in mind, I don't talk about my religious beliefs but I will say my views on that matter are far more in line with yours than your political views. Neat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 11, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 3 hours ago, OldBrownsFan said: With all the mocking of God speaking the universe into existence it still seems more easy for me to believe that than the alternatives. And that is getting to the heart of the issue It's easier to believe there's a sun god that hides the sun each night than to understand how our planet moves in space too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 Just now, MLD Woody said: And that is getting to the heart of the issue It's easier to believe there's a sun god that hides the sun each night than to understand how our planet moves in space too The heart of the issue is that science and trying to understand the universe comes to a dead end with an impossible bridge to cross with understanding how creation could come from nothing. At best you can come up with some god particle that started everything but then of course you have to take that god particle for granted and where did it come from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 11, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 24 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said: The heart of the issue is that science and trying to understand the universe comes to a dead end with an impossible bridge to cross with understanding how creation could come from nothing. At best you can come up with some god particle that started everything but then of course you have to take that god particle for granted and where did it come from? Don't read into the name "God" particle too much Don't ever assume there is an impossible bridge to cross. That has come up countless times in history and it has been crossed each time. And with each crossing religion has moved their goalposts back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 29 minutes ago, MLD Woody said: Don't read into the name "God" particle too much Don't ever assume there is an impossible bridge to cross. That has come up countless times in history and it has been crossed each time. And with each crossing religion has moved their goalposts back. And that would also be the case with assuming the "settled science" claims of global warming/cooling are true? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 11, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 2 hours ago, OldBrownsFan said: And that would also be the case with assuming the "settled science" claims of global warming/cooling are true? Scientific research advances. Hypotheses are tested. Models are adjusted. The notion that there are complete 180 swings in the scientific community are overblown in my opinion. An article you read from decades ago doesn't equate to the scientific consensus. The point of the scientific method is to keep advancing and tweaking. Again, that's the whole point. You're coming in with a conclusion and trying to find evidence. Instead you should be gathering evidence and developing a conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 30 minutes ago, MLD Woody said: Scientific research advances. Hypotheses are tested. Models are adjusted. The notion that there are complete 180 swings in the scientific community are overblown in my opinion. An article you read from decades ago doesn't equate to the scientific consensus. The point of the scientific method is to keep advancing and tweaking. Again, that's the whole point. You're coming in with a conclusion and trying to find evidence. Instead you should be gathering evidence and developing a conclusion. Nah Woody, different sides of the same coin about creation theory. What you are saying is that one day science may make some break through to prove that creation came forth out of nothing. It is wrong therefore for me to assume that is an impossible bridge to cross when in the future science might be able to prove creation did spring forth from nothing. If I make that kind of argument on a biblical issue you would say I was making a God of the gaps argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 11, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 hour ago, OldBrownsFan said: Nah Woody, different sides of the same coin about creation theory. What you are saying is that one day science may make some break through to prove that creation came forth out of nothing. It is wrong therefore for me to assume that is an impossible bridge to cross when in the future science might be able to prove creation did spring forth from nothing. If I make that kind of argument on a biblical issue you would say I was making a God of the gaps argument. No you're making a god of the gaps argument now by choosing creationism because there is currently a "gap" in ever advancing science... Scientists will also continue to try and bridge that Gap and continue to learn. A creationist wouldn't. And if that Gap was filled in they'd reinterpret the Bible in some way that makes it look like it said it all along Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 hour ago, OldBrownsFan said: Nah Woody, different sides of the same coin about creation theory. What you are saying is that one day science may make some break through to prove that creation came forth out of nothing. It is wrong therefore for me to assume that is an impossible bridge to cross when in the future science might be able to prove creation did spring forth from nothing. If I make that kind of argument on a biblical issue you would say I was making a God of the gaps argument. Again, and I cannot stress this enough, to say that science argues the universe "came from nothing" is beyond an inaccurate description. One that you feel privy to assign for the sake of your own argument that, on the surface, would cosmetically "invalidate" what theories discovery offers. When you want to have a intelligent discussion, you'll first need to acknowledge that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/a-mathematical-proof-that-the-universe-could-have-formed-spontaneously-from-nothing-ed7ed0f304a3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, tiamat63 said: Again, and I cannot stress this enough, to say that science argues the universe "came from nothing" is beyond an inaccurate description. One that you feel privy to assign for the sake of your own argument that, on the surface, would cosmetically "invalidate" what theories discovery offers. When you want to have a intelligent discussion, you'll first need to acknowledge that point. You meant "an" intelligent discussion but when asking for an intelligent discussion what does using proper English have to do with anything? 😉 My argument is simply this. Of the theological views the atheist has the weakest argument. There is a greater argument for the existence of God than for the non existence of God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 5 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said: You meant "an" intelligent discussion but when asking for an intelligent discussion what does using proper English have to do with anything? 😉 My argument is simply this. Of the theological views the atheist has the weakest argument. There is a greater argument for the existence of God than for the non existence of God. And your argument at least has overwhelming support in your own mind. So you'll always have that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 38 minutes ago, DieHardBrownsFan said: https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/a-mathematical-proof-that-the-universe-could-have-formed-spontaneously-from-nothing-ed7ed0f304a3 "Today they get their wish thanks to the work of Dongshan He and buddies at the Wuhan Institute of Physics and Mathematics in China. These guys have come up with the first rigorous proof that the Big Bang could indeed have occurred spontaneously because of quantum fluctuations." ****************** Well since they have figured out the mysteries of the universe these guys need to get to work on curing the coronavirus that came from Wuhan China. That should be small potatoes for them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 minute ago, tiamat63 said: And your argument at least has overwhelming support in your own mind. So you'll always have that. This isn't only my argument or position but you can believe what you want to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 "Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." (Albert Einstein) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 Scientific Proof of the Bible. The Bible is estimated to have been written between 1450 B.C. and 95 A.D. This chart shows scientific facts and principles referred to in this ancient Bible, but not actually discovered by humankind until later centuries. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 5 minutes ago, calfoxwc said: Scientific Proof of the Bible. The Bible is estimated to have been written between 1450 B.C. and 95 A.D. This chart shows scientific facts and principles referred to in this ancient Bible, but not actually discovered by humankind until later centuries. I know the bible is not a science book and is never intended to be a science book. It is a revelation book. God revealing things to us and in revealing things we find out through science the accuracy of what is revealed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 49 minutes ago, tiamat63 said: And your argument at least has overwhelming support in your own mind. So you'll always have that. Actually Tiam I don't believe my argument is logically speaking the best one. If I was strictly going by what seemed logical it would be there is a God but not a personal God. I believe in a personal God because of Jesus and the cross. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 11, 2020 Report Share Posted March 11, 2020 3 hours ago, MLD Woody said: No you're making a god of the gaps argument now by choosing creationism because there is currently a "gap" in ever advancing science... Scientists will also continue to try and bridge that Gap and continue to learn. A creationist wouldn't. And if that Gap was filled in they'd reinterpret the Bible in some way that makes it look like it said it all along And you are making a leap of faith that science one day will prove what you believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 12, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 7 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said: And you are making a leap of faith that science one day will prove what you believe. I'm looking at the history of advancement of scientific knowledge and making an educated guess that this advancement will continue. We'll have to see where that develops. The important thing is that we're still striving to learn more ..opposed to rolling with a frequently edited old book and calling it a day THAT'S the point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 12, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 3 hours ago, OldBrownsFan said: 😉 My argument is simply this. Of the theological views the atheist has the weakest argument. There is a greater argument for the existence of God than for the non existence of God. [citation needed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 15 minutes ago, MLD Woody said: I'm looking at the history of advancement of scientific knowledge and making an educated guess that this advancement will continue. We'll have to see where that develops. The important thing is that we're still striving to learn more ..opposed to rolling with a frequently edited old book and calling it a day THAT'S the point And we have scientists who also are Christians and I don't think they are using the bible for their research. What seems to be happening is that many of the bible truths are being confirmed by scientists instead of being disproved. At least some of the things science said the bible got wrong, the science was later to be proved wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 15 minutes ago, MLD Woody said: [citation needed] Would you really want me to post 50 links (or more)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 6 minutes ago, OldBrownsFan said: Would you really want me to post 50 links (or more)? yep, you betcha. Then he won't have time to read any of them. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.