Certainly worth a gander.....but don't delete it just because you don't believe it.

[Kenn]

This post took off lol. I was going to post yesterday on page 1 and now I’m on page 13.

As a Christian I think it’s very arrogant that we humans think that we know how God created us or that we could even begin to understand what he has done. Yeah we have science and it shows facts but I believe the science makes sense because God created it that way.

I personally don’t believe we will ever find “facts” or “evidence” that God created the earth because that would take away free will from us. He created this world in such a way that it would not need interference on his part. People point to evolution and I say what if God created it? What if God did in fact create the whole universe in a way where it would not need any adjustments and it could run out on its own?

I feel like I have a way more simplistic view then most people and granted I don’t have any degrees in anything never even went to college but sometimes I feel like this conversation just turns into who can beat who up with “facts”.

Nicely said. As a former christian and now an atheist, I wish all religions would stop thinking they know exactly what god thinks. Maybe they could then live their own beliefs without pushing them onto others or killing people who believe differently.

 

[Red Letters]

This post took off lol. I was going to post yesterday on page 1 and now I’m on page 13.

As a Christian I think it’s very arrogant that we humans think that we know how God created us or that we could even begin to understand what he has done. Yeah we have science and it shows facts but I believe the science makes sense because God created it that way.

I personally don’t believe we will ever find “facts” or “evidence” that God created the earth because that would take away free will from us. He created this world in such a way that it would not need interference on his part. People point to evolution and I say what if God created it? What if God did in fact create the whole universe in a way where it would not need any adjustments and it could run out on its own?

I feel like I have a way more simplistic view then most people and granted I don’t have any degrees in anything never even went to college but sometimes I feel like this conversation just turns into who can beat who up with “facts”.

Look up Chuck Missler on youtube and go through his teaching on Genesis he lays out clearly that science backs up creation with evidence. He’s passed away now but he was a legit genius (I think I remember reading he had a 170 IQ) he spent his life in the professional world https://chuckmissler.com/biography and he spent 50 years studying and teaching the Bible.
More importantly are his teachings on eschatology, its been the most amazing study I have ever been through….and they do offer his courses in a collage format, since you mentioned never having gone to college.
You guys that deny the existence of God are in a unique position that no one in history has ever been in before. There is more written about the coming events than any other thing written about in the Bible, think about that, God wrote history in advance and we are task with figuring it out. I challenge any of you guys that aren’t believers to go through his Bible in 24 hours on youtube, trade 24 hours of the best education you will ever get for an eternity.

Daniel’s prophecies told the EXACT DAY Jesus would arrive as the Messiah and God held the Jews responsible for not recognizing Him and that day. We will be held accountable for not recognizing the coming events as well. Everything going on now is indicating we have a front row seat to the end times and the Bible says as it starts thing will move quickly. They have already put things in place for a one world government, our monetary system will be converted to a digital currency etc. The temple will soon be rebuilt in Israel and soon afterwards the antichrist makes his appearance. During the holocaust 1 in 3 Jews were killed, during the coming tribulation its believe 2 in 3 will be killed.
Klaus Schwas of the world economic forum is already saying in 10 years we will own nothing. The food shortages, supply chain issues, the pandemics are all planned events inching us closer and closer to those same goals.
Buckle up because this ride is going to get bumpy.

 

[Hpark3r]

Wait. You're quoting a Southern Baptist minister to me?

Before I looked him up the statement meant basically nothing to me.

But knowing that he was President of a denomination that exists because they packed up their pulpits and started their own church so they could keep owning slaves makes it even more irrelevant to me.

I said nothing of a convention that is obviously seriously riddled with problems. I simply shared a statement from a really good preacher that struck me as profound (and convicting for me) when I heard it.
The devil wants to cause division between you and I as believers- it makes it easier for the scoffers to discount us and takes us away from our task in the great commission.

 

[displacedtexan]

Nicely said. As a former christian and now an atheist, I wish all religions would stop thinking they know exactly what god thinks. Maybe they could then live their own beliefs without pushing them onto others or killing people who believe differently.

As a Christian...

I wish everyone who believes in any God or Gods would quit using their faith to belittle, oppress, or kill others.

It's on me to believe as I see fit, help those that want it, and let others do the same.

It's up to God to do everything else.

 

[HighUintas]

One really important question.

What brand of bible do you guys like to run? Are there any ultralight CF bibles out there? Do you pack only the new or old testament to save weight? If you're Mormon, do you forego the bible and just pack Joseph Smith's greatest hits? Have you drop tested your bible sufficiently?

Lastly, what is your favorite method for tuning your bible kit?

Just needed to add some rokslideness to this thread.

 

[Sapcut]

This is quite literally the theory of evolution by natural selection.

Pre-existing genetic code exists. There's a copy error in that code (which is totally plausible unless you don't believe in things like recessive genetic disease). That copy error is a mutation that confers some sort of advantage. That advantage leads to that individual and all of it's offspring being just a little more successful reproductively. On a long enough timeline the copy error becomes ubiquitous.

That's my problem with people arguing against evolution. They either A) Don't understand the theory (like asking why if we evolved from apes, apes still exist); or B) actually do believe in the theory and just don't know it because they, again, don't know what the theory says.

No one who has ever argued with me about evolution has been able to explain it correctly. Or they have explained it correctly, acknowledged their belief in the underlying process, then claimed that that isn't evolution by natural selection.

What and where is the extinct ape we evolved from? Is that too an idea that man came up with without any facts to which infer?

 

[displacedtexan]

I said nothing of a convention that is obviously seriously riddled with problems. I simply shared a statement from a really good preacher that struck me as profound (and convicting for me) when I heard it.
The devil wants to cause division between you and I as believers- it makes it easier for the scoffers to discount us.

You quoted a guy who led it. He and his statements are irrelevant to me.

In the words of Woodrow Call- “You know how it works, Jake. You ride with the outlaw, you die with the outlaw. Sorry, you crossed the line.”

 

[Sapcut]

This is quite literally the theory of evolution by natural selection.

Pre-existing genetic code exists. There's a copy error in that code (which is totally plausible unless you don't believe in things like recessive genetic disease). That copy error is a mutation that confers some sort of advantage. That advantage leads to that individual and all of it's offspring being just a little more successful reproductively. On a long enough timeline the copy error becomes ubiquitous.

That's my problem with people arguing against evolution. They either A) Don't understand the theory (like asking why if we evolved from apes, apes still exist); or B) actually do believe in the theory and just don't know it because they, again, don't know what the theory says.

No one who has ever argued with me about evolution has been able to explain it correctly. Or they have explained it correctly, acknowledged their belief in the underlying process, then claimed that that isn't evolution by natural selection.

You think it may be just a bit bias when evolutionists do not even consider an intelligent designer as an option for the origin of life and the evolving of said life?

When trying to figure out what happened, a supernatural mind or intelligence is not even an option as an answer to explore. So they are left to the only other option…. come up with something natural as a theory.

As Stephen Meyer says….. all information is traced back to a mind that created it. All scientists know that until it becomes a supernatural conversation. Wonder why that is?

 

[Hpark3r]

You quoted a guy who led it. He and his statements are irrelevant to me.

In the words of Woodrow Call- “You know how it works, Jake. You ride with the outlaw, you die with the outlaw. Sorry, you crossed the line.”

Well, I guess it’s a good thing I didn’t mention Peter, Paul, David, Abraham, or any of the men of the Bible. I wish you well.

 

[ODB]

This is quite literally the theory of evolution by natural selection.

Pre-existing genetic code exists. There's a copy error in that code (which is totally plausible unless you don't believe in things like recessive genetic disease). That copy error is a mutation that confers some sort of advantage. That advantage leads to that individual and all of it's offspring being just a little more successful reproductively. On a long enough timeline the copy error becomes ubiquitous.

That's my problem with people arguing against evolution. They either A) Don't understand the theory (like asking why if we evolved from apes, apes still exist); or B) actually do believe in the theory and just don't know it because they, again, don't know what the theory says.

No one who has ever argued with me about evolution has been able to explain it correctly. Or they have explained it correctly, acknowledged their belief in the underlying process, then claimed that that isn't evolution by natural selection.

I understand evolution. I will
Never cease to wonder though, how a common, complex trait, like the eye and its corresponding and equally (really more) complex connected nervous system evolved so early in evolution’s history while other, gross anatomical traits seeming lagged for eons. Damn near every species shares bilateralism and the same/similar supporting systems, from hormonal to lymphatic, circulatory, respiratory, etc. those needed to exist in such successful numbers to allow procreation in further numbers to allow the gross anatomical changes e.g. From ape to man.

Things like instinct also make me wonder. Consider a brood parasitic bird. The egg is deposited in the nest of another bird species. It hatches early and then kills the nest mates with a hooked beak that is only used to kill the nest mates. Or other species literally push the competing eggs out of the nest. Both of these happen while the bird is completely blind. The birds natural mother never has an opportunity to teach its chick how to kill its nest mates. But kill it does. And has, for whatever thousands of years. Things like inherited knowledge show the limits of our understanding. We simply sit back and marvel at them but still have absolutely no clue how it works.

And as far as pre-existing code. Nothing pre-exists in nature. If evolution is based on a code that already existed, where did the code come from? If it evolved, what did it evolve from? Like I said elsewhere. Science answers nothing; only opens more doors.

 

[displacedtexan]

Well, I guess it’s a good thing I didn’t mention Peter, Paul, David, Abraham, or any of the men of the Bible. I wish you well.

Thank you for proving my point.

I guess...

 

[Hpark3r]

@ODB this. The irreducible complexity is something I’ve never seen anyone explain away. The heart, for example, has to be complete and in pretty good working order in order to pump blood and sustain life. Anyone who has ever been to the cardiologist can attest to that!
The eyeball, as you mentioned, is mind blowing

 

[Hpark3r]

Thank you for proving my point.

I guess...

I don’t get it. The Bible is full of flawed (some seriously!) men who God used to further His kingdom. I’m grateful He allows even me to be a part of that as well. I’m sorry if I upset you, that really was not my goal

 

[P Carter]

My very small food for thought would be as follows:

It would be a mistake to look for scientific truths in a theological work. It would be a mistake to look for theological truths in a scientific work. In both cases, you run the risk of unnecessarily distorting both the theology and the science.

 

[Hoodie]

What and where is the extinct ape we evolved from? Is that too an idea that man came up with without any facts to which infer?

Chimpanzee–human last common ancestor - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No specific fossil specimen has been identified as the exact candidate for the last common ancestor for humans and chimps, because that would be difficult.

However, many now-extinct primate remains have been discovered. Why is it not plausible, given that we know of many extinct primate species, that one of those is a common ancestor for homo sapiens and chimps?

 

[robtattoo]

You guys that deny the existence of God are in a unique position that no one in history has ever been in before.

Only because you good, loving, religious folk quit beating us to death with big rocks, burning us, drowning us & lopping off our heads. Mostly.

 

[mmw194287]

I keep checking back to see if anyone changes their mind or if one side wins! Exciting to follow along!

 

[ODB]

My very small food for thought would be as follows:

It would be a mistake to look for scientific truths in a theological work. It would be a mistake to look for theological truths in a scientific work. In both cases, you run the risk of unnecessarily distorting both the theology and the science.

Yes. There is a good book called The Bible in the Age of Reason (1961) that gets at this.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

This is quite literally the theory of evolution by natural selection.

Pre-existing genetic code exists. There's a copy error in that code (which is totally plausible unless you don't believe in things like recessive genetic disease). That copy error is a mutation that confers some sort of advantage. That advantage leads to that individual and all of it's offspring being just a little more successful reproductively. On a long enough timeline the copy error becomes ubiquitous.

That's my problem with people arguing against evolution. They either A) Don't understand the theory (like asking why if we evolved from apes, apes still exist); or B) actually do believe in the theory and just don't know it because they, again, don't know what the theory says.

No one who has ever argued with me about evolution has been able to explain it correctly. Or they have explained it correctly, acknowledged their belief in the underlying process, then claimed that that isn't evolution by natural selection.

Thank you for explaining that. I find it annoying how christians like to tell their own version of evolution to suit their fairy tales and personal narratives.

 

[HighUintas]

For you guys that are into translating the bible literally, and I guess also you guys who are Christian but don't take it literally, have you read the book Zealot, by Reza Aslan? I'm curious to hear your take on it if you have. I haven't read it myself, but my wife did and she gave me a very good summary. It's on my to read list.