Queso Posted May 24, 2005 Report Posted May 24, 2005 muahahaha. hey emtee, i'm a transvestite god. worship me
Buffy Posted May 24, 2005 Report Posted May 24, 2005 thats is not the God of the Bible..God only asked of human sacrifice once, but the child never died..it was a test for Abraham, and his obedience to God, after Abraham failed once before...but God stopped him, and suplyed for himself a lamb instead...There was no human sacrifices for the Lord. It is people like Abraham and his faith and obedience, that God shooses to use for his great work. not only people like him to love and to grant salvation.Well, I'm not surprised that this goes straight over your head, but once is enough, and its really not all: it says he demands absolute obedience. Lot's wife was the other example here (not a prophet, by the way): "Don't look back because I say so. And if you do I'll turn you into a pillar of salt." If she's the only God, why does she care whether or not you believe in her rather than some other god, god beings or whatever? Why doesn't she love us all? Why shouldn't we all get into heaven? Why should we have to believe only in the *right* version of Christianity (there are some sects who insist that non-baptists will all go to Hell too, are you one of those?). And in spite of all this its all one big "love fest?" I know that none of this causes any congnitive dissonance for you, but it does for a lot of other people. Sounds like a gang with a bizarre initiation ritual... Cheers,Buffy
Biochemist Posted May 24, 2005 Report Posted May 24, 2005 You still didn't really answer this. Are all muslims, jews, hindi, buddhists, taoists and other non-christians all going to hell because they haven't been saved?At the risk of sounding heretical (as is my custom, I suppose) the Bible does a much better job of identifying who is saved than who is lost. The Bible was not written to identify the minimum standard for salvation. It was written to show a path to connection with God. Focusing on exactly who is lost is a little bit off of the core message.
Buffy Posted May 24, 2005 Report Posted May 24, 2005 the Bible does a much betrer job of identifying who is saved than who is lost. The Bible was not written to identify the minimum standard for salvation. ... Focusing on exactly who is lost is a little bit off of the core message.Death by a thousand cuts... Implication is a much more devastating rhetorical approach than direct attack... But of course, the 10 (15?) Commandments are all "thou shalt NOT's", so even that one kinda blows away your argument.... Cheers,Buffy
gubba Posted May 25, 2005 Report Posted May 25, 2005 Sorry folks, JUST WHAT HAS THE BIBLE GOT TO DO WITH CHANCE AND EVOLUTION!!!!!! If I want to discuss religion I go to a forum dedicated to the subject. I've already posted on this subject today so I'm going to repeat myself. I'm sick of having this scientific site hijacked by those who hold the views of the providers of this site with disdain!! THERE IS A VAST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OPEN DEBATE(more than acceptable, fervently to be encouraged) and DOGMATIC, INTRANSIGENT, QUARRELLING!!!!! I'm sorry but I'm increasingly questioning the motives of a few who post here and I OBJECT! I strongly believe a forum for religion is required and I, an absolute athiest, would probably visit the site occassionally to try to understand where religious people are coming from, but I'll never attempt to shove my views down your throats, please attempt to abide by the spirit of a forum as far as possible, EVERYONE!!!! very grumpily gub!!!
Buffy Posted May 25, 2005 Report Posted May 25, 2005 JUST WHAT HAS THE BIBLE GOT TO DO WITH CHANCE AND EVOLUTION!!!!!! If I want to discuss religion I go to a forum dedicated to the subject. ... please attempt to abide by the spirit of a forum as far as possible, EVERYONE!!!! very grumpily gub!!!Dots a good question gub, unfortunately emtee opened the thread, and its gone off into the ol' science versus religion debate. Sorry to have fed it! To a certain extent, we do have to follow what the thread opener wants... I agree there ought to be an "Evolution Quiet Lounge" for actual discussion of evolution, whereas I'll still argue that the "Evolution Ad Hominem Attacks by Science-Haters" has a very important role in the societal impact of science and does belong on a science forum. I argue that if we just ignore these people, they will not go away and they will cause irreparable harm to society if they are not refuted in public forums like this one. Cheers,Buffy
eMTee Posted May 25, 2005 Author Report Posted May 25, 2005 The Bible's explanation of the way to heaven is totaly diffrent than any other religion..it's teaching says that... good works don't determin wether or not you go to heaven or hell( all mans' works are as filthy rags to God).. it teaches that God will take anyone and everyone who accepts Jesus, no matter if he or she is like Billy Grahm or Osoma bin Ladin. (whoever is repentent of their sin, God will be forgive and include into his family), it teaches in eternal security (nothing can take your salvation away from him if you are his child), it teaches that Jesus died to save you, because no one is good enough to take that position to God.. God loved you so much, he sent his son Jesus) to die..Jesus loved you so much that he was willing to take the sin and experience seperation from his father, and death...... All the rest of the religions say if you are good enough to go to heaven, you might make it...or, everyone is gong to heaven. I know that this subject is not accepted in the sciences... so I will not burden you with the rest of the diffrences. I'm not a "SCIENCE HATER"
Biochemist Posted May 25, 2005 Report Posted May 25, 2005 Death by a thousand cuts... Implication is a much more devastating rhetorical approach than direct attack... But of course, the 10 (15?) Commandments are all "thou shalt NOT's", so even that one kinda blows away your argument....I don't understand your argument, Buff. Do remember that NO ONE has EVER complied with the first commandment. You know, the one that Jesus said was most important? I am not sure why you see a set of God's behavior and attitudinal preferences as evidence for His desire to send folks away.
TeleMad Posted May 25, 2005 Report Posted May 25, 2005 Boy, this thread's a huge waste of time. I just worked my way through the last couple days' post: a slew of them. And how much science did I find? Zilch, for all practical purposes. This is SCIENCEFORUMS.COM isn't it?
JR414 Posted May 25, 2005 Report Posted May 25, 2005 I would like to add something that hads been puzzling me for quite some time now, Is there a difference between evolution and mutation? Evolution is a change that is supposed to be beneficial to that certain organism to adapt, but happens over a long period of time, and a mutation is a sudden random change of the DNA structure causing physical/mental changes, i was debating on whether or not evolution and mutation were the same, ill tell you why this came to mind- In class we talked about the "Theory of Use and Disuse" which is obviously an absurd theory (in my point of view), the theory was- If an organism constantly uses a trait, that trait becomes more developed, also the acquired trait "can" be passed on to offspring- Ex: A giraffe spends its life stretching its neck and its neck becomes longer,thus meaning that its offspring will be born with a long neck...WRONG I was talkin to my teacher about this situation, shes said that in Africa there was a point in time when giraffes had short necks, then a mutation happened causing them to have long necks. (bear with me please) But... at the same time as the mutation occured there were no leaves for the giraffes with the short necks to eat ( there were only leaves on the high parts of the trees) Now, a mutation that happened to the giraffes while the leaves on the lower parts of the trees were gone couldn't be a coincidence, (I brought this up w/ my teacher and she didnt reply) so the giraffes w/ short necks died out because they couldn't reach the leaves, leaving the long necks giraffes. I dont know how it came to be that giraffes acquired long necks right at the same time as the leaves being gone... i dont know if this makes any sense, but i don't think it is just a coincidence. this is what brought me into this state of confusion
JR414 Posted May 25, 2005 Report Posted May 25, 2005 i forgot to take into consideration that, mutations are usually not beneficial, but still, could evolution be a type of mutation?
Queso Posted May 25, 2005 Report Posted May 25, 2005 Boy, this thread's a huge waste of time. I just worked my way through the last couple days' post: a slew of them. And how much science did I find? Zilch, for all practical purposes. This is SCIENCEFORUMS.COM isn't it? stuck in the middle, like rain and thunder. :hihi:
eMTee Posted May 25, 2005 Author Report Posted May 25, 2005 Is there a difference between evolution and mutation? Now that you mention it, I cannot see evolution without mutation, evolution is based off of and relys on, and is made up of mutations. without mutations, evolution would not be thought of being even remotly possable as we know it. Have you ever thought of reversing the evolutionary process, of simple thing turning into more things of more complexity, to complex things turning into simple things? This is more understandable and better common sence. You pointed out a very imtortant part of science (mutations causing more harm than good) I think it would be a better theory to say that people turn into apes, rather than apes turning into people.
JR414 Posted May 25, 2005 Report Posted May 25, 2005 so there is a difference, evolution is based off mutations
eMTee Posted May 25, 2005 Author Report Posted May 25, 2005 so there is a difference, evolution is based off mutations Basically yes, when it comes down to it. A giraffe spends its life stretching its neck and its neck becomes longer,thus meaning that its offspring will be born with a long neck...WRONG That's like saying (if you and your offspring live your life waving your arms around in the air, then down the line, your kids are going to be born with stretched and deformed arms and hands.
Recommended Posts