Few Bible expressions have become as much a part of everyday speech as “Armageddon” has. The term has been widely used to describe the gloomy prospects facing humans. The entertainment industry has fed people’s imagination with horrific scenes of a coming “Armageddon.” The word is shrouded in mystery and misconceptions. While ideas as to its meaning abound, most of them are not in line with what the Bible—the source of the expression—teaches about Armageddon.
Since the Bible links Armageddon with “the end of the world,” it is vital to have a clear understanding of what the word really signifies. (Matthew 24:3, King James Version)
An examination of the Bible shows that instead of bringing a cataclysmic end, Armageddon will introduce a happy beginning for people who desire to live and thrive in a righteous new world.
The word “Armageddon” has its origin in the Hebrew expression “Har–Magedon,” or “Mountain of Megiddo.” It is found at Revelation 16:16, which states: “They gathered them together to the place that is called in Hebrew Har–Magedon.” The Bible explains who are assembled to Armageddon, and why. Revelation 16:14: “The kings of the entire inhabited earth” are gathered together “to the war of the great day of God the Almighty.”
The Bible explains where these “kings” fight. The reference to the “Mountain of Megiddo” does not mean that Armageddon will be fought at a certain mountain in the Middle East. For one thing, no such mountain really exists—at the site of ancient Megiddo, there is only a mound rising about 70 feet [20 m] above the adjacent valley plain. In addition, the area around Megiddo could not begin to hold all “the kings of the earth and their armies.” (Revelation 19:19) However, Megiddo was the site of some of the fiercest and most decisive battles in Middle Eastern history. Thus, the name Armageddon stands as a symbol of a decisive conflict, with only one clear victor.
In addition, the Bible explains over what issue these kings battle, and with whom. Armageddon cannot be just a conflict among earthly nations, since Revelation 16:14 states that “the kings of the entire inhabited earth” form a united front at “the war of the great day of God the Almighty.” In his inspired prophecy, Jeremiah stated that “those slain by Jehovah” will be scattered “from one end of the earth clear to the other end of the earth.” (Jeremiah 25:33) Thus, Armageddon is not a human war confined to a particular location in the Middle East. It is Jehovah’s war, and it is global.
At Revelation 16:16, Armageddon is called a “place.” In the Bible, “place” may signify a condition or a situation—in this case, that the entire world will be united in its opposition to Jehovah. (Revelation 12:6, 14) At Armageddon all earthly nations ally themselves against “the armies that were in heaven” under the military command of the “King of kings and Lord of lords,” Jesus Christ.—Revelation 19:14, 16.
Armageddon will not be a holocaust involving weapons of mass destruction or a collision with a celestial body. A loving God would not allow such a horrific end to humankind and their home, the earth. He expressly states that he did not create the earth “simply for nothing” but “formed it even to be inhabited.” (Isaiah 45:18; Psalm 96:10) At Armageddon, Jehovah will not ruin our globe in a cataclysmic conflagration. Rather, he will “bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”—Revelation 11:18.
When will Armageddon come? Examining the book of Revelation in the light of other parts of the Bible determines the timing of this crucial battle. Revelation 16:15 links Armageddon with Jesus’ coming as a thief. That word picture is also used by Jesus in describing his coming to execute judgment on this system of things.—Matthew 24:43, 44; 1 Thessalonians 5:2.
As shown by the fulfillment of Bible prophecies, since 1914 we have been living in the last days of this system of things. Marking the final part of the last days will be the period that Jesus called the “great tribulation.” The Bible does not say how long that period will be, but the calamities associated with it will be worse than anything the world has ever seen. That great tribulation will culminate at Armageddon.—Matthew 24:21, 29.
Since Armageddon is “the war of the great day of God the Almighty,” there is nothing that humans can do to postpone it. Jehovah has set an “appointed time” for that war to start. “It will not be late.”—Habakkuk 2:3.
Why would God wage a global war? Armageddon is closely related to one of his cardinal qualities, justice. The Bible declares: “Jehovah is a lover of justice.” (Psalm 37:28) He has seen all the acts of injustice perpetrated during man’s history. This naturally provokes his righteous displeasure. Thus, he has appointed his Son to wage a just war in order to do away with this entire wicked system.
Only Jehovah is capable of waging a truly just and truly selective war during which righthearted individuals, wherever they may be on earth, will be preserved. (Matthew 24:40, 41; Revelation 7:9, 10, 13, 14) And only he has the right to impose his sovereignty over all the earth, for it is his creation.—Revelation 4:11.
The Bible doesn’t specify what forces Jehovah will use against his enemies. What we do know is that he has at his disposal the means to devastate the wicked nations completely. (Job 38:22, 23; Zephaniah 1:15-18) However, God’s earthly worshippers will not participate in the battle. The vision in Revelation chapter 19 indicates that only heavenly armies will share with Jesus Christ in the warfare. None of Jehovah’s Christian servants on earth will take part.—2 Chronicles 20:15, 17.
What about survivors? No one needs to perish at Armageddon. The apostle Peter observed: “Jehovah . . . does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9) And the apostle Paul stated that God’s “will is that all sorts of men should be saved and come to an accurate knowledge of truth.”—1 Timothy 2:4.
To that end, Jehovah has wisely made sure that the “good news of the kingdom” is proclaimed far and wide, in hundreds of languages. People everywhere are being given the opportunity for survival and salvation. (Matthew 24:14; Psalm 37:34; Philippians 2:12) Those who respond favorably to the good news can survive Armageddon and live forever in perfection on a paradise earth. (Ezekiel 18:23, 32; Zephaniah 2:3; Romans 10:13)
Many wonder, however, why a God who is the very embodiment of love would inflict death and destruction on much of humankind. It is because of Jehovah’s deep affection for humans that the battle of Armageddon has to be fought. God’s purpose is to make the earth a paradise and to elevate mankind to perfection and peace, with “no one making them tremble.” (Micah 4:3, 4; Revelation 21:4) God must eliminate those who threaten the peace and security of their fellow humans—the incorrigibly wicked—for the sake of the righteous ones.—2 Thessalonians 1:8, 9; Revelation 21:8.
Much of the strife and bloodshed today is caused by imperfect human rulership and the selfish striving for nationalistic interests. (Ecclesiastes 8:9) Seeking to expand their influence, human governments totally disregard God’s established Kingdom. There is no indication that they will relinquish their sovereignty to God and Christ. (Psalm 2:1-9) Such governments must therefore be removed to pave the way for the righteous rule of Jehovah’s Kingdom under Christ. (Daniel 2:44) Armageddon must be fought in order to resolve once and for all the issue of who has the right to rule this planet and humankind.
Jehovah’s active intervention at Armageddon will be with mankind’s best interests at heart. In the face of worsening world conditions, only God’s perfect rulership will completely satisfy mankind’s needs. Only by means of his Kingdom will true peace and prosperity prevail. If God forever refrained from taking action, hatred, violence, and wars would continue to plague mankind as they have throughout the centuries of human rulership. The battle of Armageddon is actually one of the best things that could happen to us.—Luke 18:7, 8; 2 Peter 3:13.
Armageddon will accomplish something that no other war has ever accomplished—the end of all wars. However, the end of war has eluded all human efforts. Such repeated failure of human attempts to end war merely emphasizes the truth of Jeremiah’s words: “I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.” (Jeremiah 10:23) Regarding what Jehovah will accomplish the Bible promises: “He is making wars to cease to the extremity of the earth. The bow he breaks apart and does cut the spear in pieces; the wagons he burns in the fire.”—Psalm 46:8, 9.
As the nations use their deadly weapons on one another and threaten to destroy the environment, the Maker of the earth will take action—at the Biblical Armageddon. (Revelation 11:18) This war, therefore, will accomplish what God-fearing men throughout the ages could only hope for. It will vindicate the rightful rulership of earth’s Owner, Jehovah God, over all his creation.
Thus, Armageddon is not to be feared by people who love righteousness. Rather, it provides a basis for hope. The war of Armageddon will cleanse the earth of all corruption and wickedness and open the way for a righteous new system of things under the rule of God’s Messianic Kingdom. (Isaiah 11:4, 5) Instead of being a frightening cataclysmic end, Armageddon will signal a happy beginning for righteous individuals, who will live forever on a paradise earth.—Psalm 37:29.
David wrote:
---Proof that [Jesus' words were recorded second and third hand] isnt true: http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-authors.html
Also look at the timeline and would it not be possible that these authors lived to actually see Jesus' testimony? ---
Hmmm, good reference which I think proves my point. The authors of the NT wrote it many years "AD" meaning after death, up to 90 years AD. Some were with Jesus, many others were not. The entire bible according to your site was written by 40 people over 1500 years. Some stories are verified by other authors, some are lone accounts of what happened. Of course, if you put a brand of "God's word" on the whole book, what's to argue? I will consider those stories told by multiple authors but I'll question the lone author. And again, the catholics cherry picked the bible's contents. Not all NT writings are represented.
---Also, relate the timeline of Daniel's and Isaiah's writing and relate them to prophetical outcomes. But since you think the those are bunk, research into end time prophecies. Such as the woman on the beast (the catholic church), the woman riding on a beast by the way is a church siding with the antichrist which explains this church to be located between 7 hills within rome, hence the Vatican, single monetary sytem (the euro), the resurrection of the roman empire (the U.N. and the E.U.), the sign of the beast (not positive but check out http://www.verichipcorp.com/ ---
Every century has had people claim the world was coming to an end based on biblical prophesy and what was going on that century, even before Christ appeared. I remember my mother saying that WW2 was prophesised and she thought, as a young girl, it meant the end of the world. Hitler was the antichrist she said. I remember those sayng the year 2000 would be the end. You should have been around in the 1960s with nuclear war an imminent threat. I was ducking and covering in school. The end of the world is nothing new. And look at your own words! The EU is the resurrection of the Roman Empire? I remember when the USA was called that by some who said the end was near. The UN? The UN is not a government but a committee which has no army or unitary force, which is why it is so hard for it to do anything, which is the way it was designed.
It seems to me that very old text, obviously out of context, and interpreting it to represent present day conditions ought to be easy. Lets see ... I'll pick a random prophesy from Nostradamus and twist it into what I like. I found quatrainne XI2:
---
"How much gold and silver will have to be spent
When the Count will desire to take the town,
Many thousands and thousands of soldiers,
Drowned, killed, without doing anything there,
In stronger land will he set foot,
Pygmy aid by the Copy-holders"
---
Ok, let see:
-spend money = spend national treasure
-Count takes town = president takes Baghdad.
-soldiers killed = soldiers killed
-without doing anything = a stalemate
-stronger land = USA
-Pygmy aid = Bush, a pygmy to Cheney
-Copy-holders = hmmm, had to look up the definition: mechanical device used in printing.
So this OBVIOUSLY is a reference to, oh my, our current war in Iraq (how coincidental!). It is saying that Bush launched a war for naught, it drew to a stalemate but many soldiers were killed. In the end Bush, the leader of the stong land (USA) was really a small aid to the real power, the print media, meaning Fox News. My God! Nostradamus predicted it! Hey, this is fun!
---So, prophecy could likely be working today. Then what do you say?---
I say prophesy is bunk or people would be reading propheses and going out and putting money strategically in the stock market and getting wealthy based on prophesy. Church leaders who claim to know prophesy would be very wealthy, which they are but not by making money that way.
But what actually happens is not prediction of coming events that come to pass but instead taking prophesy to point out events that are happening or have recently happened. Few actually stand in the street proclaiming midnight will be the end of the world though thousands have. Most just tell you its coming. And like a fortune teller make it as vague as possible. Pat Robertson came close when he predicted with prayer that he could turn a hurricane. It didn't turn but he had an out, not enough people prayed!
---Once again you used an OT testament concerning rape. (2 Samuel). And like I said before maybe you should ask a Jew since christians do not live by the law but by grace. That subject there is basic philosophy that you SHOULD understand.---
You have been telling me that the bible is the word of God. I have been saying that God seems to have changed over time but you say he has not. I then point out where God prescribes a neighbor raping a man's wife in front of him as God's punishment for the man and you say I'm taking it out of context. So is the bible God's word or is it, the OT anyway, just Jewish law written by jewish men in the context of the day who say its God's word but is not?
And I do understand the basic phylosophy. I just don't see it practiced by many who call themselves christian and I see many christians ignore that overall phylosophy of love and take snipets of the bible, twist the meaning, and use it as validation for hateful acts, such as "an eye for an eye". Many Christians today are for the death penalty. Talk about hipocracy...
---Well, gotta run. My wifes buggin me. Thanks again Fate. Have a great week.---
I plan to. Lots of eggs to dye and hide. Oh my, is coloring easter eggs and hiding them in the OT, the NT, or am I performing a pagan act?
---And I think I'll pass on the book. Thanks anyway, I'd rather not think about such things as I sit and lay back on the beach to enjoy God's creation. :) I thought you might like that.... :)---
While you're in Hawaii do some sight seeing. Note the lava flows. Note how the islands are continuing to grow. Note on a map the islands, how they get bigger as you go east. Maybe talk to a park ranger and learn about the "hot spot" under Hawaii and how the earth's crust has moved over millions of years over the hot spot. Also note the wildlife, how it is not the same as where you live but similar, but perfectly adapted for life in Hawaii. Once you see the world for what it is, you will see that nature is a very natural thing, with no need for a God. Only then you can begin to really appreciate the wonder of life on this planet and how precious it is, and we are.
Thanks for this very informative blog. I think it is time, however, we all start learning from our differences rather than fighting about them. Never before has society been so divided. This is a time we all need to come forward with mutual respect and goodwill towards all. I truly beieve in a much bigger God than the one we have all obviously heard of for so long.
Rather it be the Christian God, Muslim God, or Budha! (whatever!) We are all in this thing called- ~life~ together!
We should all hope for peace to be shared together. As well, for each to have their own peace respectively. No matter which concept of God one blieves their own truth! Why would one who tuly knows God within want any thing less for another human being. I beg to know the answer to this...
Futher by forcing our own superiorty of belief forward, over others equally as dedicated to a different belief, is truly, in my mind anyway, not indicitive of having deep peace within as touted otherwise in their faith. Love your differences! (some may say enemies) And allow each the right to have their own truth.
If you are secure with your own beliefs truly, you shouldn't have a need to prove it to others, nor force your rules on any self-governing body of people. Wear your respective religions in your heart where it belongs, and not thurst on others.
All extreme religions are dangerous. And I think we are seeing that now in our own country. The rise of Christain Nationalism has been nothing but decisive to our country, and I would think, to the very messege Christians want to put forth. Rather it be Pat Robinson or other
fundlementalist christian counterparts, or rather it be Osma and his counterparts as well, the taliban, makes no difference.
Both are overly rigid to the non believer of their faith, and to the like believer as well....
And BOTH are out of mainstream to their own perspective societies. Yet, I stil do struggle, nonetheless, to understand the Christian perspective these days. I do repect thier deep rooted faith, but I beg to know why they feel I am the one intolerant bcause I don't want to embrace a theocracy in my country, as with how it was with, the Taliban, in Afghanistan. On the contrary, it feels to me that is what Christian Nationalist seek. Oppression is relevant to all. Even when it is not as overt as the Taliban. Please help to understand the differences.
As A matter of fact, the similarities seem too eerily close. On another note, I personaly do not believe in the concept of Hell. But if ones needs to believe in that concept, as one much more articulate than I once said "I'ts your Hell, So you Burn it" Sad if that is your choice though.. because I truly think happiness and peace for all us, regardless, is the best alternative. I know For myself, though, that whatever heaven is... wherever it is in it's Glory... God indeed has it for me! And, no, I do not fear death....
On the other hand, I do fear, what we can do to each other here on earth!
I'm just out the door to get to the airport but I wanted so badly to see your response. Really briefly let me clarify a couple of things.
You said,
The bible was made by taking writings that were made after Christ died by people who were there but no longer alive. So Jesus' words were recorded second and third hand.
Also look at the timeline and would it not be possible that these authors lived to actually see Jesus' testimony? Also, relate the timeline of Daniel's and Isaiah's writing and relate them to prophetical outcomes. But since you think the those are bunk, research into end time prophecies. Such as the woman on the beast (the catholic church), the woman riding on a beast by the way is a church siding with the antichrist which explains this church to be located between 7 hills within rome, hence the Vatican, single monetary sytem (the euro), the resurrection of the roman empire (the U.N. and the E.U.), the sign of the beast (not positive but check out http://www.verichipcorp.com/
So, prophecy could likely be working today. Then what do you say?
Once again you used an OT testament concerning rape. (2 Samuel). And like I said before maybe you should ask a Jew since christians do not live by the law but by grace. That subject there is basic philosophy that you SHOULD understand.
Well, gotta run. My wifes buggin me. Thanks again Fate. Have a great week. And I think I'll pass on the book. Thanks anyway, I'd rather not think about such things as I sit and lay back on the beach to enjoy God's creation. :) I thought you might like that.... :)
David wrote:
---First off, rape. In no way does God "command" as you say to rape anyone.---
Check out: 2 Samuel 12:11-14
"Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.' Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die."
So God punishes David by having David's neighbor rape his wives. God also kills David's child whom I assume was innocent of anything David did. Also check out: Deuteronomy 21:10-14. I have pointed out these passages in the bible in earlier postings, maybe you missed them. Rape was required by God of captives in many conflicts (after giving the rape victim time to mourn the murder of her parents of course).
---To clarify the subject of the Hebrews. Yes they are chosen by God to prove Himself through their bloodline. God vowed that they as a people would be a part of history from beginning to end. It was not until Jesus' time that Jews and Gentiles alike could recieve salvation from God. Once again that is basic Christian philosophy and proves you really do not have any knowledge in the subject.---
Yet you say God has not changed from the OT to the NT. But he did in that he now considers Jews just as equal with respect to getting into heaven as gentiles. What happened to gentiles during OT times? Were they denied heaven for a reason? Why did God change his mind about gentiles? If he changed his mind he is not immutable.
---No the Bible clearly states the determination of true nature in the first two verses of the Bible which I have shown you. Not much is specified and probably could not have been since scientific means were not around then.---
But these are the words of God. Does He not know science? I would be very impressed if he said light has no mass, the universe is expanding, or that there were other planets or even stars. None of this was known at the time by man so I'm not surprised God didn't know it either.
---How can all these denominations have so much in common but enough to split them apart. They all use the Bible in their own terms which is why organized religion has been perverted. But a lot of these denominations have similiar conclusions.---
I agree. I think it shows the power religion has and how some people want their own version of that power. The Catholic church was from the beginning the sole power of christianity. A good reading of Henry VIII might help explain how man, as you say, perverted thr religion. But I would go back to Christ who disagreed with the Rabbis of his day and basically split off Judiasm into another faction, christianity. As I see it, its just man being man.
---Oh and great Einstein knows about gravity? How was gravity made? And do you know what made the products that made gravity?---
All good questions which you will not find answers to in the bible. But answers to questions like that have been found through scientific research.
---And you still deny the fact that the Bible is an historically correct document.---
Yes.
---So I guess the Constitution of the United States must not be legal historical fact either because there is no one alive today that saw it signed.---
Good point. History and documentation are important. The constitution was witnessed, signed, duplicated and spread thoughout the colonies. The consensus at the time was that it was real as signers of the time verified. That is why it is signed and by so many people and multiple copies were made and each digned. They knew as we know today that for a document to have validity it cannot be created in secret and its origins kept secret. The bible was made by taking writings that were made after Christ died by people who were there but no longer alive. So Jesus' words were recorded second and third hand. Then these documents were accumulated and church leaders picked some and discarded others. They did not include them all because there were conflicts. The gnostic writings were discarded. A few were taken as 100% correct and included. I find it hard to imagine that the scripture reviewed at the time was either completely correct or completely wrong and that the people making these decisions were completely right. So I feel the NT is simply what the early christian leaders put together based on their understanding of christianity at that time. I feel the NT reflects the thinking of the early christians but is not a complete historical document and I would not be surprised it has errors. Which are errors and which are correct I cannot say. No one can. I will take the ones multiple authors agreed on and question the parts that have inconsistencies or have only one author.
---And how do we know that wasnt just last thursday? If you cannot recognize the Bible as historically accurate then there is no reason for this debate.---
It could have been last Thursday, it could have been 6000 years ago. God's capabilities are infinite. If you are going to take the bible to be as accurate as, say, the constitution, then you need to go back and read how the bible was put together to understand how much of it can be trusted.
---And if man is fallible in their writings in the Bible maybe man is fallible in their scientific research?---
I completely agree! I have worked in the lab. I know how you can run an experiment three times and get three different answers. Science trusts only in repeatability, mathematical analysis and the accumulation of evidence. I would put the bible in that last category. The authors of the bible seem to agree on the life of Jesus and I have no doubt he existed. But you also need to understand that miracles were being performed at the same time by many other people. Also remember that Mohammed is credited with miracles of his own that were documented. Do you doubt those miracles? Because they are documented, probably better, than the bible's: http://www.jews-for-allah.org/Muhammad-and-Judaism/miracles-of-mohammed.htm
---So once again you make claims to your reasoning but put mine on higher standards.---
I don't see how.
---Its wonderful how God used you (someone I do not even know or even agree with) to show me his awesomeness.---
It was 80 degrees yesterday, I took a walk at lunch. Was he showing me how pleased he was for helping you? Its amazing how a belief in a God can make you imagine anything.
---To be honest this is the first time I have ever debated the issue of God and I think God used this to inspire me to seek His word even further.---
Good. I like to question everything. It got me beaten by nuns in catholic school but I've never regreted it. Truth is too important.
---Everything I challenge on both sides of the debate continue to press me in the belief of God and of Jesus. One cannot just read the Bible to understand its message but must study it over and over again to gain the true wisdom that comes from it, just like science does.---
Science has a much higher standard since belief is not a valid reason to accept something as real. Religion and science have no comparison. Only one involves reason, thinking and proof.
---All in all I think we all look for a meaning to life and the reasoning behind it whether it be scientifically or spiritually. For me, spirituality seems to answer the questions science could never prove.---
As I pointed out before, religion explained the sun until nuclear fusion was discovered. Spirituality needs to be understood. Like a tree falling in the forest, would there be spirituality if man became extinct?
---If all we are are a bunch of particles that will cease to exist, the meaning for this debate is purposeless.---
Not at all. If you ever come to the conclusion that you are the result of particles forming life and evolving into you over billions of years, the wonder of it all is much more immense than God waving a wand. Some people study hurricanes, others tornadoes and are impressed that they form out of nothing to grow and yield such destructive power. I am impressed with life having formed, evolved and organized into multicellular organisms like ourselves.
---Why would you care to enlighten me on your theories if we're all just a bunch of particles that will soon evaporate. Why not just let me live my lie and my fantasy since it makes me happy?---
Fair question. Just look at what those who are living the fantasy have done to our government and our laws which affects us all. What I consider your delusion does affect me and others just as you may feel Pat Robertson affects your religion. By pointing out the delusion I'm trying to get some sanity back into society.
---But for me its the teachings of Christ that give reason to this debate. Us being taught to love one another and to truly love someone we would want that person to experience to love Christ has for all of us.---
As I've said I use the bible's parobles as I use Aesops, to learn how to treat my fellow man in a good way. Man is not some out of control killer that needs religion to make him civil. Human society, like animal societies, live well without religion. But morality really means not breaking the golden rule, not treating someone in a way you would not want them to treat you. It always comes back to the golden rule. That is what I find separates us from the animals, that we can empathise for each other thanks to our unique frontal lobe, the site of human reasoning and unique to humans.
---And if science cannot come up with a meaning of life then why should you care. Science doesn't teach you to care. Human instinct? Not really if we are all just a bunch of particles waiting to not exist.---
I agree. Morality is not the rhelm of science. Yet people, religious and not, seem to be able to get along just fine in most cases.
---Its been a heck of a debate Fate. [...] I cannot debate with someone who claims to have knowledge of the Bible but shows otherwise. It would therefore be pointless. I tried to show you the true meanings in the Bible but you refuse to accept them even though you clearly wanted answers.---
Your answers require complete belief in the bible's correctness. That is something I and even many who are believers do not agree with.
Enjoy Hawaii and maybe pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" to read on the beach. I haven't read it and its controversial in its attacks on religion, but it might keep your search for the truth going. My life phylosophy is that "people are stupid", which includes myself so its ok when I make a mistake but also keeps me aware of my flaws so I'm careful. I'm also tolerent of other people being stupid, running red lights and such. Human stupidity is prevalent which I think is obvious but rarely admitted. To improve ourselves we need to acknowledge our flaws and face up to them, even if it means questioning what we have been taught as an absolute truth since childhood.
Once again you continue to either miss the point or dismiss it before even thinking about it. First off, rape. In no way does God "command" as you say to rape anyone. I think tolerance is the issue. As a Christian, we do not follow the ways of the OT so I suggest asking someone who follows Judaism why it is tolerated. You claim to know the teachings of the Bible but it is very clear that you have no idea what you are talking about. To claim God changed from the OT to the NT is obsurd and to make such a claim constitutes for a misinterpretation of God.
You say man is fallible which he is but wrote the Bible which they did. But scripture has proven itself to be the divine Word of God through prophecy in which subject you still want to avoid. That's fine ignore that if you will. I guess I can take my pick and choose of the points you make too. Oh and please continue to forget how I asked how the particles to people theory could ever be proved in that something (actually someone, ID) HAD to have to created that.
To clarify the subject of the Hebrews. Yes they are chosen by God to prove Himself through their bloodline. God vowed that they as a people would be a part of history from beginning to end. It was not until Jesus' time that Jews and Gentiles alike could recieve salvation from God. Once again that is basic Christian philosophy and proves you really do not have any knowledge in the subject.
you said,
You trust the bible but the bible has done a very poor job determining the true nature of the universe. So why do you think they got it right about the true nature of God?
No the Bible clearly states the determination of true nature in the first two verses of the Bible which I have shown you. Not much is specified and probably could not have been since scientific means were not around then. Sorry Moses did not know about the theory of relativity or even gravity. Those verses can be left open to debate but they truly do leave open the fact that God has been before creation and also a supposed billions of years into the geological era. And I do disagree with a lot of things catholics do but some are agreeable with Christianity. How can all these denominations have so much in common but enough to split them apart. They all use the Bible in their own terms which is why organized religion has been perverted. But a lot of these denominations have similiar conclusions.
Oh and great Einstein knows about gravity? How was gravity made? And do you know what made the products that made gravity?
And you still deny the fact that the Bible is an historically correct document. So I guess the Constitution of the United States must not be legal historical fact either because there is no one alive today that saw it signed. And how do we know that wasnt just last thursday? If you cannot recognize the Bible as historically accurate then there is no reason for this debate. And if man is fallible in their writings in the Bible maybe man is fallible in their scientific research? You cannot continue to hold the Bible to higher accounts of criticism than any other legal historical document. And you cannot discredit man for writing it when its man that pushes the claim for science. I do believe science to be a correct method in determining specific findings so I must trust in man. As so with the Bible.
So once again you make claims to your reasoning but put mine on higher standards. I guess all I can do is hope that you can humble yourself even just a little to think about what I'm saying for minute and not just what your saying. All in all its been a good debate that needs to end sometime. Its wonderful how God used you (someone I do not even know or even agree with) to show me his awesomeness. To be honest this is the first time I have ever debated the issue of God and I think God used this to inspire me to seek His word even further. Everything I challenge on both sides of the debate continue to press me in the belief of God and of Jesus. One cannot just read the Bible to understand its message but must study it over and over again to gain the true wisdom that comes from it, just like science does. All in all I think we all look for a meaning to life and the reasoning behind it whether it be scientifically or spiritually. For me, spirituality seems to answer the questions science could never prove. If all we are are a bunch of particles that will cease to exist, the meaning for this debate is purposeless. Why would you care to enlighten me on your theories if we're all just a bunch of particles that will soon evaporate. Why not just let me live my lie and my fantasy since it makes me happy? But for me its the teachings of Christ that give reason to this debate. Us being taught to love one another and to truly love someone we would want that person to experience to love Christ has for all of us. There may be no scientific evidence for how Christ can change lives but He has to millions of people over a span of centuries. And if science cannot come up with a meaning of life then why should you care. Science doesn't teach you to care. Human instinct? Not really if we are all just a bunch of particles waiting to not exist.
Its been a heck of a debate Fate. Im going on vacation tomorrow so I wont be checking this site for at least a week. And from recent responses from you, I think the debate is over. I cannot debate with someone who claims to have knowledge of the Bible but shows otherwise. It would therefore be pointless. I tried to show you the true meanings in the Bible but you refuse to accept them even though you clearly wanted answers. Thanks for your input Fate and I learned a lot from you. Things I do not think I could have learned from anyone else. I'll keep you in my prayers and will always hope the best for you. Maybe one day we'll see each others point of views but maybe not. As long as we have a mutual respect I'm good with that. Take care. And HAWAII HERE I COME!! I need a tan.
David wrote:
---God has never changed since the beginning until now.---
No? If the Hebrews are his chosen people how will christians get into heaven? They are not Hebrew therefore not chosen. When did God change the rules and allow non-Hebrews into heaven?
Why do you think this contradicts the immutability of God? After all, both Old and New Testaments agree 100% percent on this, since it is the New that quotes the Old saying:
And, "Thou, Lord, didst found the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of thy hands; they will perish, but thou remainest; they will all grow old like a garment, like a mantle thou wilt roll them up, and they will be changed. But thou art the same, and thy years will never end."
(Heb 1:10-12 RSVA)
How can _anyone_ come up with a reasonable interpretation of this passage _without_ realizing it implies the immutability of God?
David wrote:
---God has never changed since the beginning until now.---
No? If the Hebrews are his chosen people how will christians get into heaven? They are not Hebrew therefore not chosen. When did God change the rules and allow non-Hebrews into heaven?
---Regarding your verses in Deuteronomy:
22:28-29. Rape by force is mentioned here. But you must understand it culturally to understand its true meaning.---
I understand that women had no rights and the bible (God's word) tried to place some rules on a culture where women had no rights, launching wars on other societies was normal, and defining rules (laws) for what to do if a woman was raped. But what you are doing in your defense of the bible is placing it in a cultural context. Does God's laws exist in a cultural context or are they absolute? If your daughter was raped should the judge the rapist is brought before fine him 50 dollars to be given to you and tell the rapist he must marry your daughter? Are we more moral than God because our society today has determined rape is unacceptable in any context?
---No I could not prove scientifically that I was not born last Thursday or even the actual date I was born. But ask the eye witnesses to the account and also my birth certificate and you would come to the conclusion of my date of birth.---
And if all of the witnesses and the documents were also created last Thursday? If the world was created in place with people, their memories, documents etc, all created last Thursday, you could not prove it correct or incorrect. So I am free to believe it is true and there is no way you could prove it wrong, scientifically or otherwise. But just because you cannot prove it wrong does not make it right and the burden of proving it right is on me and not on you to prove wrong. Yet you want me to prove the bible wrong. I have tried to show inconsistencies, God's acceptance of rape, and the incorrect statements in the bible of the earth's age and creation of animals at once and unchanging. The evidence of these being incorrect is overwhelming but it seems the burden is still on me somehow.
---Your right in saying that these men were catholics who decided the original canon. But it was not until the time of Martin Luther that the Bible we have today came into play.---
Maybe we can agree that the bible may not contain all the accurate writings of the time? And it might even be possible some of what got into the bible was not correct but seemed correct? In other words, Christ's words were written corectly or incorrectly by men, saved or destroyed over time, accumulated by men, determined by men for their worth and addition to the bible. Man is fallible yet the bible is taken as perfect. How can that be?
---1:1 In the beginning 1 God 2 created 3 the heavens and the earth. 4 1:2 Now 5 the earth 6 was without shape and empty, 7 and darkness 8 was over the surface of the watery deep, 9 but the Spirit of God 10 was moving 11 over the surface 12 of the water. 13 I wonder how long God was just chillin before He created the earth as we know it today. Possibly billions of years? This verse leads to the openness that it could very well be possible this earth is billions of years old.---
Careful, that's what the catholics say. They also accept that evolution is just another of God's plans. For me its just the religion giving up in the face of overwhelming evidence and accepting reality or looking stupid, as the creationists look stupid. This process has been going on since the first days of the church. Stars are now distant suns, planets are not stars, the universe is very large, no shell (firmamant) exists, the earth revolves around the sun. etc., etc., etc...
---I am really glad you made me challenge both sides, science and God. Because maybe its just possible that science is proving God right now.---
Unlikely. As I showed in the above paragraph, science is pretty much proving some of the bible is wrong, the OT anyway, in the earth's age, the evolution of life. And wrong morally (rape, war, etc) though that is not science's relm.
---And when was time invented? If the world really is 15 billion years old, how much time was before that? That would be inconcievable to the human mind as only a finite God could understand. Is it not more probable that God created time when He created the 7 day week? Science can only bring you to a certain point in logical thinking which therefore you have to ask questions as to how could such perfection be created and how long were we in limbo before these particles started to make us?---
Time is my favorite subject. Einstein found it is relative and it has been proved that time in the presense of gravity runs slower. The astronauts in the space station are actually aging a little faster, ending up a few milliseconds older than if they stayed on earth. Not much but it has been scientifically measured. You trust the bible but the bible has done a very poor job determining the true nature of the universe. So why do you think they got it right about the true nature of God?
Do you know what the firmament is? Its the light shining through a dome covering a flat earth from heaven. Stars were not thought to be other suns in the perfect bible. That dome was fixed so comets and shooting stars were never recorded by christian historians. The supernova of 1054 which is now the crab nebula would have made the star appear brighter than venus, yet no mention of it in christian Europe, but lots of observations in non-christian China. One can only wonder what truths are being suppressed today by the church in the name of keeping the faith. Maybe the creationists are the keepers of the faith today.
---First of all Pat Robertson is a knucklehead.---
No argument from me here...
---Secondly, you NEED to look at when the books of the Bible were written. How could Kind David (1000 years B.C.) know that Christ would come one day and be "hung on a tree."---
Because hanging people on trees is an ancient method of torturous death known to King David.
---Also knowing that "not one bone would be broken," when roman tradition clearly states that when one is crucified his legs must be broken to ensure of his death. Both of those who were crucified had their legs broken. And David refers to Jesus "the one they pierced," hence the fact that he was pierced in his side with a sword. How could David had known these things 1000 years before they happened including roman tradition when the roman empire wasnt even established yet and that that tradition would be broken only with Jesus unless it was an inspired Word of God?---
We know Christ did not write anything. We know his deciples believed firmly he was the messiah. They were also Jews who knew the prophesies. So, you have very religious people who believe Chirst was the son of God and know he had to therefore fulfill the prophesies. Then they wrote down what they did. I'm not saying they lied, or mislead or embelished their text, just that it is possible. Fallible man again.
---And please tell me how Christianity could sustain for 2000 years without undeniable proof that God does not exist? Prophecy is real, you just need to check your historical dates.---
Constantine spreading christianity through war, the early accumulation of wealth by the christian church thanks to Constantine, the missionary movement to spread christianity, initially by monks but later by lay people. The incorporation of the church into governments, the inquisition suppressing truth, the pope elevated to a supreme position above kings, ... I could go on. Maybe you should ask why Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Jainism, and Taoism are older than christianity but still around. And the "three wise men" were the likely Zoroastrians based on their astrological abilities and the types of gifts given. Funny, astrology today is not considered devine by christians even though it worked to find the baby Jesus. Why?
Maybe you think God cares for even the smallest things, but I wonder why he bothered making the rest of it and why he keeps changing the rules (Garden of Eden, then no garden, the the Hebrew God of wrath, now the loving God of Christ). Maybe we are not evolving but God is?
God has never changed since the beginning until now. I gave you an example in Ezekial of God's patience before their judgement. And I gave you an example in Matthew about how Jesus' message was not to bring peace but the sword. God has never changed from the OT to the NT. He has and always will be a God of love and a God of judgement. Why do we call Him "Father in Heaven?" Because just like a father He loves us unconditionally but will punish us for going against what he says. If we are to never be punished for our sins then how are we to ever learn from our mistakes? You interpretation of God has been misleading you.
Regarding your verses in Deuteronomy:
21:10-14 does not mention the act of rape and therefore cannot be accounted for.
22:28-29. Rape by force is mentioned here. But you must understand it culturally to understand its true meaning. First off lets look at the word 'rape' as it was translated to English.
No word for 'rape' was ever found in Biblical Hebrew. And culturally what is found (and still is today)is the act of arranged marriages. In ancient times women had no rights. They were given into marriage per their fathers approval without consent from the woman. Virginity was common until marriage unless categorized as a prostitute. For whomever the woman loses their virginity to would become their husband as declared in the passages. The fiftly shekels is payment to the father since his rights in giving away his daughter to a man were taken. Back then there were no sexual ethics, just sex. And sex constituted the union between a man and a woman "to become one flesh." But no payment would be made to the father if an arranged marriage was accepted by the father. But as far as the 'rape' that we use as a word today, to force someone without consent to a sexual act, could not apply to ancient Biblical times without the force of payment and marriage to the woman. The difference between rape these days and rape in those days is the accountability. Their laws consitute the man to marry the woman compared to these days as rape could only be a violent act which upon to leave the woman with no dignity. But, according to the NT we no longer live by the laws anymore for salvation, but live by grace with which salvation comes to those who believe.
First let me say that I will look up this dino hemoglobin article and get back to you. Now, as to the question of how to prove something that cannot be repeated. This happens every day. History for example. Was your house built by God or carpenters assuming you did not watch it being built or someone did not record it on film. How do you know you were born and not just created last Thursday? You can't prove you were not.
Exactly!! By no scientific means could I prove these things. Only by legal historical fact. For example: Being born last Thursday. No I could not prove scientifically that I was not born last Thursday or even the actual date I was born. But ask the eye witnesses to the account and also my birth certificate and you would come to the conclusion of my date of birth.
Whoe. Christ left no writings so all of the NT is second hand information. The Council of Nicea threw out a lot of writings to get to the four authors who basically agreed with each other, though not 100%. And those council members were catholics, the ones you say you do not trust. How can you accept the catholic bible but not catholocism? How can trust those who culled through the writings of others in Christ's day and put together the few we call the bible? You are trusting the judgement of people building a religion at the time. That means building power. Assuming it was all done in good faith ignores the sinful nature of all men
Your right in saying that these men were catholics who decided the original canon. But it was not until the time of Martin Luther that the Bible we have today came into play. The council of Nicea was mainly a debate over the Trinity belief system and whether God the Father was before Jesus the Son or were they one in the same. They concluded that the Trinity was the correct form due to OT passages proving this to be correct. The Apogrypha and Psedopygripha were added by roman catholic bishops but then later regarded as false doctrine due to historical inaccuracies and inconsistencies with OT scripture. Furthermore, your right in saying Christ left no writings of His own. But it was eyewitness accounts, not just from Christians but from roman authorities as well (Pontius Pilate) that verified the testimony of Jesus.
I find something quite interesting in the first two verses of the Bible:
1:1 In the beginning 1 God 2 created 3 the heavens and the earth. 4
1:2 Now 5 the earth 6 was without shape and empty, 7 and darkness 8 was over the surface of the watery deep, 9 but the Spirit of God 10 was moving 11 over the surface 12 of the water. 13
I wonder how long God was just chillin before He created the earth as we know it today. Possibly billions of years? This verse leads to the openness that it could very well be possible this earth is billions of years old. And that maybe its mankind that has seen this world in such a short time period according to chronology of the Bible. I am really glad you made me challenge both sides, science and God. Because maybe its just possible that science is proving God right now. And when was time invented? If the world really is 15 billion years old, how much time was before that? That would be inconcievable to the human mind as only a finite God could understand. Is it not more probable that God created time when He created the 7 day week? Science can only bring you to a certain point in logical thinking which therefore you have to ask questions as to how could such perfection be created and how long were we in limbo before these particles started to make us?
You said,
The prophesies that were written about AFTER they happened? You're sounding like Pat Robertson (sorry, not intending to offend).
First of all Pat Robertson is a knucklehead. He thinks the world is gonna end this year when it clearly states in the Bible that no man will know the time but will only heed the warnings. He thinks he knows the time which is contradictory to true Christianity. Secondly, you NEED to look at when the books of the Bible were written. How could Kind David (1000 years B.C.) know that Christ would come one day and be "hung on a tree." Also knowing that "not one bone would be broken," when roman tradition clearly states that when one is crucified his legs must be broken to ensure of his death. Both of those who were crucified had their legs broken. And David refers to Jesus "the one they pierced," hence the fact that he was pierced in his side with a sword. How could David had known these things 1000 years before they happened including roman tradition when the roman empire wasnt even established yet and that that tradition would be broken only with Jesus unless it was an inspired Word of God? And please tell me how Christianity could sustain for 2000 years without undeniable proof that God does not exist? Prophecy is real, you just need to check your historical dates.
Now that you say you understand the creationist lies you should use the www.talkorigins.org site to get to the truth on creationist claims, which is what this site does. One thing you should have initially done when you heard the claim was question why, up until Schweitzer, all dino bones were found fossilized with no hemoglobin or DNA. If dinos were around a few thousand years ago a lot of tissue would be found in dino bones and this would not be news. Scientists have enough DNA from mammoths to consider cloning one for example. They were killed by the flood as were the dinos according to the creationists. You don't need years of scientific training to see a con job. You just need to not take everything that supports the bible at face value and ask questions. You should also ask yourself why people need to lie to reinforce the belief.
---But the idea of creatinism is still a valid scientific point in that evolution really has no definitive answer. How can something be proven without being able to repeat it? All other means of science use this method to prove their findings except evolutionism. How can one recreate the earth and all living things except God?---
First let me say that I will look up this dino hemoglobin article and get back to you. Now, as to the question of how to prove something that cannot be repeated. This happens every day. History for example. Was your house built by God or carpenters assuming you did not watch it being built or someone did not record it on film. How do you know you were born and not just created last Thursday? You can't prove you were not.
Evolution initially began by fossil studies and studying living creatures that seemed relates (dogs & cats for example). Since the dates of the fossils were important methods of dating fossils or the sediments they were found in became a science of its own. Its used not only for fossil dating but archeological dating, the same archeology you initially said proved God existed. Its also used in geology to determine oil and gas deposits. But back to evolution, as fossil finds accumulated hypotheses were formed, such as one species evolving into another over time. If the hypothesis was correct there should be a fossil of an intermediate form during a time in between the fossils in question. Many of these were found for many species. The gaps creationists used to claim was a problem in evolution in 1920 began to close. Some species have complete fossil records today. Many do not but have gaps which continue to close.
One question evolutionists have debated over was recently solved. If mammals evolved from reptiles, where did the ear bones we use to hear with come from. It looked like reptiles had these tiny bones but they were part of the jaw. No intermediate animal was discovered that had something in between. Evolution does not allow such an abrupt change since evolution is gradual. The hunt for an intermediary animal, half reptile half mammal is was thought. Just recently a reptile was discovered that had the bones in an intermediate configuration. Evolutionists were suprised it was found in a reptile and not some reptile/mammal intermediary or an early mammal. So their initial hypothesis was wrong, that it would not be found in a reptile, but their prediction that an intemediary had to exist was right. The evidence is currently being review by other scientists.
Up until the 1980s the evolutionary evidence was mainly fossil based and the "tree of life" showing how species branched off from extinct species was made. Then DNA was discovered and DNA sequencing of many animals began and continues today. When you look at the DNA differences it follows the "tree of life", well, almost. There are some surprises though not big enough to toss it all. Some species were found to be related more closely or le ss close to different fossils than we thought. Still, the agreement between the DNA and fossil evidence is very high. You do not need to repeat something to show how it happened anymore than a forensic investigator needs to repeat a homocide to determine what likely happened. And in the case of evolution, the earth contains millions of years of evidence still be gathered.
---And once again what created all those particles that became people? And where did they come from? Admitting to not being able to answer those questions has left serious doubt in the minds of many scientists.---
Doubt about what? Few scientists consider God when they do their work. Few if any scientists will find a question they cannot answer and proclaim the bible the obvious answer because the question cannot be answered today. Remember the church (and scientists of the day) thought the sun revolved around the earth? When Copernicus proved them wrong he was threatened with imprisonment for heresay. Maintaining religious doctrine at all costs did not begin with creationists.
---But evolutionists goal is to prove there is not God and we can sustain life without Him.---
No it is not. They are scientists looking at evidence, forming hypotheses and determining not only what happen as animals evolved but by what methods. God's existance is on few minds when they do their work anymore than He is on your mind when you do your work, which I assume is as mind numbing as mine. Evolution is not a religion. You need to get over that presentation by creationists. If it were no scientist would accept it anymore than they accept creationism.
---The problem with that is that without God we begin to feel like we can be God.---
We do? Explain. And what about believers who feel God is on their side, like Bush who feels he has God on his side and can flaunt the Constitution. The problem is that total belief in God can lead people to assume God approved of anything they do, like the ancient Hebrews.
---So, in conclusion to this statement I must admit that I was at fault for pointing out that creationist are valid scientists. You are right in that they have a pre-bias commitment to their false findings. But, evolutionists have a few questions that need to be answered for their theories to be correct too. Do not think that science is infallible? Because it isn't.---
We agree. Scientists are the last to trust a scientific finding until it is investigated, studied and rigorously peer reviewed. Many people buy snake oil hoping somehow the salesman was right, or buy magnets to heal sore knees. Most people believe anything. Scientists trust very little without evidence.
---You asked whether I go to a doctor or church when I get sick. Of course a doctor! God gave us science to help us.---
But it seems only if it is consistent with the religious texts. Science that shows the bible is flawed is somehow a belief in itself. You cannot call evolution a belief but cancer researchers true scientists. Both work using the same scientific methods.
---But, let me give you an example of science gone wrong, personally. My wife came across a condition known as Guillen Barre Syndrome. An auto immune system disorder that affects the nervous system. She was told it would be 6 months to a year to walk again and that it would require her to be in the hospital until she was able to walk. 8 weeks later she was discharged with a full recovery. They brought in specialists from around the bay area (thats where we live) and they all could not figure out how that could be possible. But through prayer, and faith my wife beat science. This experience acknowledges further Gods existence...at least to me.---
I googled the disease picked the first website: http://www.answers.com/topic/guillain-barr-syndrome
It says trhe following about the prognosis (how it will progress) will go:
"Most of those afflicted with GBS recover completely, although the recovery can in some cases be slow (months to years). Complete recovery usually occurs when the symptoms fade within three weeks of appearing. The typical scenario is for a patient to experience the most weakness from 10–14 days after the appearance of symptoms, with complete recovery occurring within weeks or a few months. In contrast, a poor prognosis can be associated with a rapid appearance of symptoms, use of assisted ventilation for a month or more, severe nerve damage, and with advancing age."
Sound like she had a normal recovery. Aren't you glad the doctors did not base the disease on deamons and try exorcism, or consider her a witch? Both have happened in christianity's past.
---You cannot count on chance as a means of diagnoses and scientific proof. The backbone of evolution is "by chance."---
No. Evolution is not the result of pure chance. It is the result of the death of the unfit, or as some call it, the survival of the fittest. No chance in there except the changes in the environment. But an animal's response to that change is predictable to some extent.
---Keep in mind that not everything can be scientifically proven.---
Yes it can. Just not everything can be scientifically proven with the science we have today.
---Can you prove you went to work last week scientifically? No but you can show a timecard and have witnesses to prove you were there. Legal historical facts. That is how the Bible is proven.---
Whoe. Christ left no writings so all of the NT is second hand information. The Council of Nicea threw out a lot of writings to get to the four authors who basically agreed with each other, though not 100%. And those council members were catholics, the ones you say you do not trust. How can you accept the catholic bible but not catholocism? How can trust those who culled through the writings of others in Christ's day and put together the few we call the bible? You are trusting the judgement of people building a religion at the time. That means building power. Assuming it was all done in good faith ignores the sinful nature of all men.
---Now God has given us freewill to believe or not to believe in His teachings. You choose not to believe even though His Word has been historically proven.---
I accept much in the bible. Love, underestanding, not casting first stones, etc... It is the concept of God himself I do not believe in. And again, his words (recorded by people don't forget) have not been historically proven. Where do you keep getting that. The words were written by Christs friends, long after he died. And other writers works were ignored. How can you just take some of the history, toss other records, and call it accurate and thus proof?
---But as an intelligent human being you must admit in the historical accuricies of the Bible.---
No.
---And once again I will refer to prophecy and how that is historically accurate with minute details involved.---
The prophesies that were written about AFTER they happened? You're sounding like Pat Robertson (sorry, not intending to offend).
---By the way, quit with accusing God of rape! Please quote some scripture so I could have some verification of that. I have already discussed reasoning behind the so called "genocide" performed by God.---
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 :
"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 :
"When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."
There are many more examples. Do you think 50 pieces of silver is just for the crime of rape? Can a women be kidnapped, say in Baghdad by an American soldier, after killing her parents and made to marry the soldier against her will? God thinks so. If you do not, why? God said its ok in a time of war.
---God proves Himself historically and by means of the Jewish peoples. To show His awesome and great power He vowed that Jews would always be a part of this world and the only remaining race that was from the beginning to the end.---
How convenient that the God of the Jews decided the Jews were his favorite people...
---In conclusion, I must admit you have a greater knowledge in science than I. Most of the scientific points you made I could not begin to understand. It takes years for scientists to learn these things and I sure do not have years to study them all. Once again I am truly sorry for bringing in the creationists theories and admit that I was led in the wrong direction.---
There is hope...
---Even God said "even the elect will be decieved." And so I was. But there still is inconclusive evidence involved and many questions to be answered by evolutionists. Science is fallible but God is not. As science continues to develop new measures, I am positive God will be proven again. See, how he offers new hope and patience. If the Bible is not enough evidence for you He will give you a way of belief by means of science eventually. If you then choose not to believe then that's between you and Him. Have a nice day Fate. God bless you......I hope you dont find offense to that. :)
Not at all. If science ever does one day prove God exists then that will be fine. It sure would explain a lot, but I would then wonder why He would create the universe just to put us on this tiny blue planet. Do you have any idea how small this planet is when compared with the universe? There are parts of the universe we can never see, can never get to no matter how fast a space ship we have. You are smaller than an atom in a galaxy when compared to the universe. Maybe you think God cares for even the smallest things, but I wonder why he bothered making the rest of it and why he keeps changing the rules (Garden of Eden, then no garden, the the Hebrew God of wrath, now the loving God of Christ). Maybe we are not evolving but God is?
I am glad you are seeking some spiritual growth. I looked on that site you put as a reference. One thing I can say I agree with is that religion itself has been twisted and turned over the last two centuries and that man has created it into something God did not intend. But to focus on your spirituality would be of great importance. The Bible teaches us to trust in God and not man. Religion is man-made therefore has its faults, hence all of the denominations. That is why God offers up a personal relationship with Him so as to not fall into the trap of man. Keep in mind that this new teaching contains passages from the Apocrypha and Pseudopigrapha which are documents that have been historically proven inaccurate and inconsisten with the original teachings of the Bible. It was the Roman Catholic Church that allowed such teachings until the Lutheran Reformation. Also to keep in mind that this new teaching basis their theories on Bible accounts so do not be misled by their misinterpretations. So many people over time have been misled due to false interpretations which God spoke of would happen. And finally, "challenge everything" as directed by God in the book of James. Good luck on your spiritual quest but be careful as God warned us. Colossians 2:8 Be careful not to allow anyone to captivate you through an empty, deceitful philosophy that is according to human traditions and the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
If bringing down false religion has anything to do with the end of the 'world' then that 'process' may have already started. A new proof of God for faith, contained within a new ethical teaching for marriage is on the web and if this demonstrates itself to be authentic, then the whole of 'christian' history is looking into the abyss! My husband and I have just started to test the teaching. The stakes appear just too high to ignore. The teaching is a free download at plenty of sites. Here is one of them. www.energon.uklinux.net
Since I did tell you that "I am no scientist," my facts have been based on little research. I definately am no historian neither but I am quite more knowledgeable in proving the Bible in an historical sense.
First though I would like to point out some things I found out last night during my research of the subject. I tried to find the website of a published article in what I think was called the Journal of American Sciences??? But not too sure. But if you would like, research Dr. Mary Schweitzer. She recently found soft tissue in a T-rex bone which contained hemoglobin. She is using a new form of paleantology called molecular paleantology that no one bothered to use before due to the fact that evolution was already considered valid. Now with new research indicating that dinosaurs may well have lived in quite a significant later time, evolutionists are starting to worry all their hard work will be out the door. I will admit it is fairly new evidence that is open to scrutiny.
Now about creationist. I have found out that most creationist DO purport lies. I will definately admit my mistakes but as I said I am fairly new to the research in science development. I do believe God has shown me the right path in realizing that these people have taken scientific evidence and perverted it. Same as the roman catholic church perverting the Word of God. But the idea of creatinism is still a valid scientific point in that evolution really has no definitive answer. How can something be proven without being able to repeat it? All other means of science use this method to prove their findings except evolutionism. How can one recreate the earth and all living things except God? And once again what created all those particles that became people? And where did they come from? Admitting to not being able to answer those questions has left serious doubt in the minds of many scientists. But evolutionists goal is to prove there is not God and we can sustain life without Him. The problem with that is that without God we begin to feel like we can be God. So, in conclusion to this statement I must admit that I was at fault for pointing out that creationist are valid scientists. You are right in that they have a pre-bias commitment to their false findings. But, evolutionists have a few questions that need to be answered for their theories to be correct too. Do not think that science is infallible? Because it isn't. You asked whether I go to a doctor or church when I get sick. Of course a doctor! God gave us science to help us. But, let me give you an example of science gone wrong, personally. My wife came across a condition known as Guillen Barre Syndrome. An auto immune system disorder that affects the nervous system. She was told it would be 6 months to a year to walk again and that it would require her to be in the hospital until she was able to walk. 8 weeks later she was discharged with a full recovery. They brought in specialists from around the bay area (thats where we live) and they all could not figure out how that could be possible. But through prayer, and faith my wife beat science. This experience acknowledges further Gods existence...at least to me. You cannot count on chance as a means of diagnoses and scientific proof. The backbone of evolution is "by chance." Keep in mind that not everything can be scientifically proven. Can you prove you went to work last week scientifically? No but you can show a timecard and have witnesses to prove you were there. Legal historical facts. That is how the Bible is proven. Now God has given us freewill to believe or not to believe in His teachings. You choose not to believe even though His Word has been historically proven. But as an intelligent human being you must admit in the historical accuricies of the Bible. And once again I will refer to prophecy and how that is historically accurate with minute details involved.
By the way, quit with accusing God of rape! Please quote some scripture so I could have some verification of that. I have already discussed reasoning behind the so called "genocide" performed by God. Let me point out to you that God's intentions were to have a creation living peacefully and in harmony with God. But it was man that created sin and sin brings judgement. You may not want to believe in the "God of wrath" but never the less that is whatit is and if you really studied the Bible you can see God's long term plan and understand why those things must have taken place. God proves Himself historically and by means of the Jewish peoples. To show His awesome and great power He vowed that Jews would always be a part of this world and the only remaining race that was from the beginning to the end.
In conclusion, I must admit you have a greater knowledge in science than I. Most of the scientific points you made I could not begin to understand. It takes years for scientists to learn these things and I sure do not have years to study them all. Once again I am truly sorry for bringing in the creationists theories and admit that I was led in the wrong direction. Even God said "even the elect will be decieved." And so I was. But there still is inconclusive evidence involved and many questions to be answered by evolutionists. Science is fallible but God is not. As science continues to develop new measures, I am positive God will be proven again. See, how he offers new hope and patience. If the Bible is not enough evidence for you He will give you a way of belief by means of science eventually. If you then choose not to believe then that's between you and Him. Have a nice day Fate. God bless you......I hope you dont find offense to that. :)
victoria wrote:
---our own mortality is a very frightening topic and it takes great courage to face that question---
Speak for yourself victoria.
---all the intelletualization in the world wont push it away as we all face it at some point.---
Faced it. I'm a cancer survivor. Death is natural. Consider nothng alive in 1850 is alive today. Nothing, not animal, plant or person. Its not that hard to accept death will happen, and probably before we expect it. Jesus had one thing right though, ashes to ashes, dust to dust, not dust to heaven or dust to hell.
David wrote:
---Since it is YOUR belief that creationist scientists are not a valid means of science there is no point in the debate anymore.---
It is not a belief. It is based on what they write, how creationists lie, bend the laws of physics and introduce tiny inconsistencies to "prove" an area of science, say radioactive dating, as totally invalid. When they ignore the mountain of valid evidence in favor of a tiny inconsistency, that is tatamount to lying when it is presented as overwhelming evidence. They are liars David. If you cannot see a lie and then question the motives of the liar I can not help you. To accept a lie means you will be living life based on lies. Not a good way for anyone to live.
---There are way too many gaps and inconclusions with evolutionism as there are with creationists science too.---
Not on the evolutionary side. Who ever told you that lied. Isn't that a sin?
---Both parties have admittedly came to an inconclusive end to the subject.---
People who study evolution would not say that. Where do you get this idea that evolution scientists have admitted their research has come to an inconclusive end? Where David? Evolutionary studies right now are mainly involving the study of human DNA sequencing which is adding to the already mountain of evidence for evolution and it supports it.
---Why else do you think it is called "The Great Debate."---
It was the "Great Debate" back in the 1920s during the Scopes trial. Its 2007 David, lots of new and supportive research has been done in those 80 years. DNA was not even known then nor during Darwin's time. No scientist today calls evolution a debate. Its a fact. The methods of how evolution operates is continually studied, but like gravity, which I assume you consider a fact, the method for how it happens is a research topic. No one today knows how gravity works David. Do you doubt gravity exists because of that? What do the creationists say about gravity? Do they research it? I would imagine not since it is not necessary to spread doubt about scientific research inconsistent with the bible.
---If creationists were considered non-valid in the science community there wouldnt be a "Great Debate." And obviously with a debate labeled such as that, neither side will come to an agreement.---
You don't seem to understand how science works. Its not debating teams trying to give the best argument. Its science, running repeatable experiments, moving ideas to hypotheses to theories to dogma. Creationists go right from the bible to dogma. They do not do science. They are ignored in the scientific community as are snake oil salesmen and those with perpetual motion machines.
---The question for all evolutionists is how can you deny ID?---
Because the scientific evidence does not support it.
---Great.... big bang theory....but what (or should I say who) made the particles and neutrons and other cool science stuff to create such an elaborate theory?
Science does not know... Science does not invent Gods when it has a question, as christians did to explain how the sun stayed bright for so long. Before nuclear fusion was discovered the christian church used the sun as proof of God's existence since science could not explain the sun. Now we can. So now its the creation of the universe. Pointing to questions as proof of God is a pretty poor method of proof. But I do find it interesting that creationists accept the scientific findings of a big bang, yet say that the light we see today canot come from anywhere more than 6000 light years away, the age the bible says the universe is. So creationists accept the big bang but cannot accept the evidence for the big bang. Doesn't it make you wonder how creationists can agree on a scientific finding when they disagree with its evidence? Maybe the finding is more important than the evidence? Maybe they lie? They are human after all. Sinners every one of them.
---That's what evolution is...just a theory, never to be proven ever, even by means of science.---
Evolution is a fact. How evolution occurs is a theory, just as gravity is a fact but how its works is a theory, just as quantum mechanics is a fact but how it works is a theory. The observable and corroborated evidence is overwhelming.
---Again I ask you, why even ask me about the God of the Bible if you will not take note in the extent of His mercy. God's actions were justified in all that He has done in history even if your mind cannot comprehend it being a justifiable act. And rape?? I sure do not recall rape as part of God's plan. And yes God destroyed civilizations, men women and children.---
Read about God's "mercy" from the only source you seem willing to accept:
Judges 21:10-24
Numbers 31:7-18
Deuteronomy 20:10-14
Deuteronomy 21:10-14
Deuteronomy 22:28-29
Deuteronomy 22:23-24
2 Samuel 12:11-14
Judges 5:30
Exodus 21:7-11
Zechariah 14:1-2
And while you're reading about the slaughter of women and children at God command, don't forget the fetuses in expecting mothers, something today christians call murder.
---And upon His return He will do the same.---
Oh joy. The God of love returning to kill, rape, and enslave men women and children.
---To justify His acts in the OT, most likely the destruction of civilizations were to destroy bloodlines for a particular civilization. In part due to the sustanation of the Jewish people. Can you name any other race in the history of the world that is still around besides Jews?---
David, I implore you to read your own words. You have just justified genocide. This is the type of evil I see creeping out of religion. How religion can be used to justify the unjustifiable. bin Laden reads his Quran the same way.
---Jews are God's chosen people and are the most scattered race of people in the world. Jews are on every continent and pretty much every country.---
So are the Irish, Indians, Chinese, west Africans and Philipinos.
---Have you ever seen a mexican in poland? Not very probable. But as it was written in the Bible in the OT, the Jews will be the one remaining race from the beginning of the world until its end. Even through the holocaust Jews still thrive and always will. So because of certain civilizations disobeying God and the fact that Jews have to be the last remaining race, God is once again proving Himself real.---
Genocide proves God is real? I think I'm about to get sick...
---The science aspect of things; we can debate that for years and we can write long respone after long response with no end in sight so I'm gonna be the one to say let's leave it alone.---
You recognize that you're mind is closed?
---Trust me I am open minded to the subject.---
I see little evidence of that. You only provide "evidence" from one single source, a source Hermit notes says that the bible comes first, then the science to support it where it can find it. That's not science. Would you go to a doctor trained in creation science?
---Even if you could prove without a doubt that God is not real I still would have faith, but then that would be blind faith, with which I do not have right now.---
Its as blind as blind can be. There is no evidence supporting God's existence nor proof he does not exist. Theologians recognize that. That's why they call it faith. Faith is a belief something exists without evidence. You seem to think there is factual evidence. I suggest you go to someone who studies the bible, an academic, and ask them where the "facts" are. You might be surprised.
---One more thing concerining prophecy. Nostadamus predicted many things that did not come true which you should know.---
Yet...
---But ALL of God's prophecies have come true (except of course end times prophecies) What seperates God from some psychic off the street is that God's "predictions" so you call them, have never faultered. What are the chances of hundreds of prophecies not faultering? I think I would rather keep my faith in that than an evolutionist theory that has no significant evidence.---
Sorry to hear that David. You are following people who do not understand science, use subterfuge and lies to make you believe science is wrong when that same science made the fantastic medical leaps you will gladly use in the future. Next time you have a disease try praying yourself a cure, or go to the creationists and tell them you are not going to the hospital because those doctors use science. Have a great life David imagining yourself in heaven. Just please don't break any laws in the name of God nor do any harm to anyone as you may one day think your God commands of you, as you point out God commanded the OT Hebrews to do, as bin Laden thinks God command of him today.
Hi Fate, hope your doing good. Nice response. I am so happy to have found such an intelligent person to debate these issues. Since it is YOUR belief that creationist scientists are not a valid means of science there is no point in the debate anymore. There are way too many gaps and inconclusions with evolutionism as there are with creationists science too. Both parties have admitedly came to an inconclusive end to the subject. Why else do you think it is called "The Great Debate." If creationists were considered non-valid in the science community there wouldnt be a "Great Debate." And obviously with a debate labeled such as that, neither side will come to an agreement. The question for all evolutionists is how can you deny ID? Great.... big bang theory....but what (or should I say who) made the particles and neutrons and other cool science stuff to create such an elaborate theory? That's what evolution is...just a theory, never to be proven ever, even by means of science.
Again I ask you, why even ask me about the God of the Bible if you will not take note in the extent of His mercy. God's actions were justified in all that He has done in history even if your mind cannot comprehend it being a justifiable act. And rape?? I sure do not recall rape as part of God's plan. And yes God destroyed civilizations, men women and children. And upon His return He will do the same. To justify His acts in the OT, most likely the destruction of civilizations were to destroy bloodlines for a particular civilization. In part due to the sustanation of the Jewish people. Can you name any other race in the history of the world that is still around besides Jews? Jews are God's chosen people and are the most scattered race of people in the world. Jews are on every continent and pretty much every country. Have you ever seen a mexican in poland? Not very probable. But as it was written in the Bible in the OT, the Jews will be the one remaining race from the beginning of the world until its end. Even through the holocaust Jews still thrive and always will. So because of certain civilizations disobeying God and the fact that Jews have to be the last remaining race, God is once again proving Himself real. The science aspect of things; we can debate that for years and we can write long respone after long response with no end in sight so I'm gonna be the one to say let's leave it alone. Trust me I am open minded to the subject. Even if you could prove without a doubt that God is not real I still would have faith, but then that would be blind faith, with which I do not have right now. One more thing concerining prophecy. Nostadamus predicted many things that did not come true which you should know. But ALL of God's prophecies have come true (except of course end times prophecies) What seperates God from some psychic off the street is that God's "predictions" so you call them, have never faultered. What are the chances of hundreds of prophecies not faultering? I think I would rather keep my faith in that than an evolutionist theory that has no significant evidence.
David wrote:
---New rule: no more personal attacks. If we are to have an intelligent debate we must respect one another on a personal level. Sounds good?---
As long as you consider the bible possibly imperfect. Otherwise nothing will change your mind, the definition of a closed mind. Is your mind open?
---If you must accept evolutionism you must accept creationism.---
No I don't. The first is scientifically researched and peer reviewed. The second is made up based on a pre existing bias. The two cannot be compared. The first publishes to peer reviewed journals for other scientists to review, the second publishes in its own magazine. Its like comparing the journal Nature with People magazine.
---Both means use science as a way to determine the outcome.---
Name one peer reviewed journal creationist bunk ever was submitted to. Do you ever see creationist bunk in Nature, Science, and the hundreds of other journals out there real scientists must present their research to in order for their research to be called science, for other researchers to review for correctness, absense of bias and proper methods to rule out mistakes?
---To use the statement "creationism is bunk" would constitute for a lack of open mindedness in the scientific debate since both parties use science to determine their findings.---
No. My open mindness allows me to evaluate the "science" creationists write and I have read it and determined it is bunk. Creationists make statements or even give what you feel is a true scientific result without it being peer reviewed or being repeated experimentally. When someone tries to sell you medicine that has not been scientifically tested you would call it snake oil. Well, creationism is nothing more than snake oil. If creationism had any real factual backing they could get it into a peer reviewed journal. You might think that since it doesn't agree with the scientific dogma it would be rejected, yet there are thousands of examples of scientific results that broke with the scientific dogma that made it into peer reviewed juornals. Peer reviewers do not check that the data and results agree with dogma, they check that it was done using valid scientific methods. Creationists fail to get anything published because they do not use valid scientific methods.
Thanks for the reference. First let me take you to the bottom of the article you referenced to note that all but two references for the information they posted came from some publication called "Creation". Any high schooler would have been challenged by a teacher for obtaining so much information from one source. Take a look at the references of a real scientific publication and see the difference: http://www.research.ibm.com/antivirus/SciPapers/Kephart/ALIFE3/alife3.html
Paste this into your browser and go down to the references and compare them with references that papers at you website give. If the only reference you need is the bible or your own magazine, that is fine, just do not call it science.
Let me focus on just one claim in your link:
"Argonne National Laboratories have shown that heating wood (lignin, its major component), water and acidic clay at 150°C (rather cool geologically) for 4 to 36 weeks, in a sealed quartz tube with no added pressure, forms high-grade black coal."
Their point is that making coal does not take millions of years. I agree. But so what? They do not go on to say that these conditions existed in all the coal formations on earth do they? No, they just leave this little bit of information there and let you fill in the result they hope you take away. Do you think the earth's billions of cubic miles of coal deposits on all continents contained quartz tubes that heated wood fell into with water and acidic clay? Do they propose this as an explanation for the world's coal deposits? Do they propose this to the scientific world as an explanation for how coal formed on earth. The answer to all of those question is no, because they are not interested in making this claim to scientists who know it is wrong. They make it to those who have no scientific background, who have no idea how science determines truth. People will happily accept the result they imply because it agrees with their predetermined ideas. That's what snake oil salesmen did selling snake oil to people who had ailments science could not treat. And many people bought snake oil and many people buy creationism, but that does not make either scientific.
---I definitely am no scientist but from the research that I have obtained, both sides come to an inconclusive means of proving the age of the earth due to the scientific means of determination not being 100% accurate.---
100% accuracy never exists. Take a tape measure and measure you height. Lets say you are exactly 5' 9.18756" tall. You will probably say you are 5' 9" tall, but that is not 100% accurate. But you are certainly close. So is scientific dating of the earth. You see, if it were just one measurement using one type of measurement I'd agree with you, but its so much more. Measurements of sea floor spreading, measurement of multitudes of radioactive element dating including carbon, argon, helium , iodine-xenon, anthanum-barium, lead, lutetium-hafnium, neon, potassium-argon, rhenium-osmium, ubidium-strontium, samarium-neodymium, uranium-lead, uranium-lead-helium, uranium-thorium, and uranium-uranium. What you need to understand is that science is not one scientist making a discovery and every other scientist accepts it. Far from it, few accept it, especially if it is something new. But either way, the experiment needs to be repeated, the methods studied for error. You may not have heard about cold fusion. It was an "experiment" that some real scientists made back in the 1980s. They said they had made fusion happen at room temperature. Scientists know that when atoms fuse they give off neutrons, which will kill you if you're not shielded, which the experimenters did not mention. Many scientists asked why these scientists were still alive or neutrons were not given off, an impossibility determine from other experiments of fusion. Others tried to repeat the experiment and could not. The guys who proclaimed they had done this said everyone was doing it wrong but no one could repeat it. Most people accept that the scientists were not lying but had high hopes and were heavily biased that they created fusion, and that bias creeps into the data. All scientists know this can happen to any scientist. Its over 20 years later and still no cold fusion. Science is very demanding. You might get a fraud or mistake past scientists now and then, but its very hard and is usually caught. Science requires validation. That's why creationists do not publish in scientific journalists. Just in their own magazines believers read and have their biases reinforced. Science works to remove bias, creationism requires bias. Its a night and day difference.
---You have asked me why my God, the God of the Bible, does certain things and has a particular personality. I have given you Bible quotes (which you do not accept) to show you why my God has done these things. You wanted to know and I gave you my answer. What other answer could I give you? You want to believe that God sent Hebrews to kill whole cities but then when I give you evidence of His mercy and patience, I'm using Bible quotes which are irrelevant? How can you believe the parts of the Bible you want but when I show you a good side to God you will not accept them? So if you want to know why the God of the Bible does certain things IN THE BIBLE, you need to accept certain scriptures that support that claim.---
Look, I have read the bible, many times. I understand God's good side. What I'm trying to point out to you is that He has a side you would consider ugly if a human did the things He is said to have done in the bible, or asked man to do for him. I'm only asking that you read it all and accept the fact that God has a very ugly side, a side that supports slavery, murder, killing of children, genocide and rape. I think you said earlier that if you accept parts of the bible you must accept them all. I agree. I think we both agree people who accept some parts should accept all parts if they accept the bible is the word of God. I am asking you whether you support God's bad side, his support of slavery, genocide, child murder and rape?
---Now I hope that we could debate issues one at a time. I'm usually at work so my responses cant be too long. To me the scientific issue has passed. I know we could not come to a conclusive answer on the age of the world which is why I refer to the chronology of the Bible as a means of aging, since evolutionists cannot without a doubt prove themselves. So please let's move on.---
You are wrong, so wrong. Creationists start with the age the bible says and work backward. Scientists start with the question and work forward. If you had a cancer and your doctor KNEW that prayer would cure it because God can cure anything, and then worked backward from that to develop a treatment, would you use it, or would you use a treatment that science developed by first starting with the question of how to cure this cancer and using the scientific method, test, develop treatments and measure their effectiveness? Again, do you go to the doctor or a minister for medical treatment? That is a question you have never answered.
---Just wondering if you have researched about King Cyrus and the prophecy I gave you. If you wnat more proof of God research the city of Sidon, Tyre, Gaza and Ashkelon, Sodom and Gomorrah. Prophecies concerning these age old cities were written 100's if not 1000's of years before their occurance. This is the best way of me proving to you that God is real. Not one prophecy in the Bible was not accurate and accurate to the minute details that they gave. So, hear from ya later Fate. I guess the debate is still on. Take care.---
Should I pray to Naustadamus? His prophacies have come true as well, many say. Some of Mohammeds too. What do you say to prophesies that come true in other religions? Are you ready to jump ship and follow the other religion? You see, if science determined it were wrong, for example, that Newton's laws of motion were not accurate, they would scrutinize the new evidence and develop new theories if the evidence was valid. That's what happened when Einstein showed Newton's equations of motion were indeed wrong, well not so wrong as not very accurate. Newton assumed time was constant. It is not as Einstein "proved". He "proved" it using the scientific method. He wrote down his observations and mathematical formulas and put them out for all to review in a journal. Others reviewed his work. Some disagreed but they repeated his experiments and showed he was right. Newton's laws became a thing of the past but are still used today for very local measurements, but not things like traveling to the moon. If Newtons laws were used to go to the moon the Apollo astronauts would have died in space.
Is any of this is beginning to convince you something is amiss when creationists call their articles science? If they mislead you with the earth's age, where else are they misleading you, and more importantly, why.
Someone else who published here on On Faith told me that false faith, faith in God based on lies, was better than no faith. This person also pointed to creationist articles. I was amazed that misleading people to get them to believe in God was a goal of anyone who called themselves a christian. So I know there are christians out there trying to save your soul at any cost. That is the bunk you are reading. God gave you a good brain with an ability to analyze. You've said you have no training, that's fine, just ask good questions. My generation said to never to trust anyone over 30, not because they were all liars, but because some of them were. Creationists have proven that some of them are liars. Don't trust them. Trust no one. Think for yourself and question what you hear. I guarantee a creationist will just stare at you if you asked them what other scientists peer reviewed their work.
"If you must accept evolutionism you must accept creationism. Both means use science as a way to determine the outcome."
Unfortunately, this is not true. david gives us a link to "Answers in Genesis" to support his argument, but look at what they have to say on the matter:
"The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ."
and later:
"No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."
David, a truly scientific approach to knowledge would apply the same rigorous standards of evidence to Biblical claims as to any scientific hypothesis. The fact that Creationists demand an a priori acceptance of Biblical claims as not only true but as the final arbiter of truth without question males any claim they have to a scientific approach untrue. Science recognizes no such unquestionable authority.
These forums represent one of the major problems of the world in microcosm. The near-total lack of respectful dialogue is disheartening. Whether we're staunch beleivers or Dawkins devotees, we all should have a bit more humility than to spout off indignantly about things for which there truly are no definite answers.
Everybody's so defensive... It seems to me each side percieves itself as being under attack. I think the majority of people occupy a middle ground that is open to science and religion and a diversity of beliefs and rejects extremism at either end of the spectrum (although that statistic about 40% of Americans rejecting evolution is unnerving, I would argue it represents a failure of education on both sides of the debate). Normal people, it seems, just don't make good headlines.
It's kind of absurd to categorically reject evolutionary theory, given the mountains of evidence supporting it, but the sheer number of people for whom faith is a positive, life-enriching force (and not an impulse to violence) makes me hesitant to just dismiss it.
Religion is not the problem. Atheism is not the problem. Human beings on both sides and their eternal lack of respect and humility are the problem. If we're all so averse to religious war, why do we keep fanning the flames?
New rule: no more personal attacks. If we are to have an intelligent debate we must respect one another on a personal level. Sounds good?
Ok the issue with science and aging the world. If you must accept evolutionism you must accept creationism. Both means use science as a way to determine the outcome. To use the statement "creationism is bunk" would constitute for a lack of open mindedness in the scientific debate since both parties use science to determine their findings. Heres where I found my evidence. Copy and paste in your web browser.
I definately am no scientist but from the research that I have obtained, both sides come to an inconclusive means of proving the age of the earth due to the scientific means of determination not being 100% accurate.
You have asked me why my God, the God of the Bible, does certain things and has a particular personality. I have given you Bible quotes (which you do not accept) to show you why my God has done these things. You wanted to know and I gave you my answer. What other answer could I give you? You want to believe that God sent Hebrews to kill whole cities but then when I give you evidence of His mercy and patience, I'm using Bible quotes which are irrelevant? How can you believe the parts of the Bible you want but when I show you a good side to God you will not accept them? So if you want to know why the God of the Bible does certain things IN THE BIBLE, you need to accept certain scriptures that support that claim.
Now I hope that we could debate issues one at a time. I'm usually at work so my responses cant be too long. To me the scientific issue has passed. I know we could not come to a conclusive answer on the age of the world which is why I refer to the chronology of the Bible as a means of aging, since evolutionists cannot without a doubt prove themselves. So please let's move on.
Just wondering if you have researched about King Cyrus and the prophecy I gave you. If you wnat more proof of God research the city of Sidon, Tyre, Gaza and Ashkelon, Sodom and Gomorrah. Prophecies concerning these age old cities were written 100's if not 1000's of years before their occurance. This is the best way of me proving to you that God is real. Not one prophecy in the Bible was not accurate and accurate to the minute details that they gave. So, hear from ya later Fate. I guess the debate is still on. Take care.
David wrote:
---Ok so every proof I bring you gets thrown out like I am just accepting what some dummy had to say. So be it.
I have re-read your postings below and have yet to see a proof. You make a lot of references to the bible, which I do not accept as proof. You also made some claims (dinosaur blood, moon's orbit increasing). I asked for references so I could read about these "proofs" but you gave none.
---I guess having a logical debate with someone so hard headed as yourself is not logical.---
Now who is getting personal?
---I gave it a shot though. Ive come through with answers to your every question but all you hear is yourself.---
Read my posts below. I asked about the big bang light. No response. I've asked about God's apparent ability to require Hebrews to kill whole city populations and even specify killing the children. You say he is a God of judgement but do not explain why your God would want children killed. I've asked you where you would go when injured, the house of God or the house of science. I have a lot of questions, see them below. You answers are biblical quotes and creationist bunk.
---I know now no matter what I say or what proof I have that you will not hear. That's fine. I made my points.---
If that is all you wanted to do then you have accomplished it. But you have not done what you say you have done, answer my questions.
---I hope you can find fullfillment in your life not knowing about the true God.---
You have no idea how fulfilling living in reality can be.
---But just so you know too, geology is science. Thats just pretty basic info for ya.---
I guess you are refering to the billions of years it takes to go from particles to people. Well, guess what, that's how long it took according to science, about 3.5 - 4.0 billion years. Maybe there is something to science eh?
---I had fun debating but then you got too personal. Two words: ANGER MANAGEMENT! Later homie. Take care.---
I'm not angry. You have no idea how much fun I'm having! Did I get personal? Sorry if I did. I really would like to hear how layering of sediments can be evenly layered on valley floors and slopes as creationists say it can and how it explains sedimentary rock where the layers are not horizontal but at angles or rolling like the one I asked you about. You see, I have asked others these questions and have looked into many claims of creationists and have found there is a lot of work by creationists to confuse the science, to actually lie about certain things like sedimentary layering. Its easy to tell someone not familiar with scientific methods and findings that its all wrong. Most people do not have the training to determine whether creationists are right or whether science is right. So I don't blame people for falling for creationist bunk. I blame the creationists for consciously misleading people using people's faith to get people to accept their bunk all in the name of defending the faith against reality. Consider this; if nothing could naturally organize itself into a self contained entity as life did, then tornadoes and hurricanes could not form, yet they do, every day.
Sort of like the early christians ripped off judaism? Do you feel other christian churches ripped of the catholics who maintained christianity, developed it through the council of Nicea until the protestant reformation hundreds of years later? Please tell me what you think is the true christian church. I'll bet its the one's your parents belonged to.
Christianity is a runoff of Judaism. You cant have Christianity without Christ right? If it werent for pre-Christ Judaism Christianity wouldnt be born. And catholics did not maintain christianity, christianity maintained itself. The council of Nicea was a determination of the canons with which the catholic church added their own canons including the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.
you said,
Prove? I thought faith meant something could not be proved? I thought belief in God was not based on proofs but on acceptance. So you have proof? Bring it forward, please. You would be the first. If anyone told you there was proof of God's existence, they lied to you.
I think you got religions mixed up because the Christian God wants us to try to prove Him wrong. Too many people think you have to have "blind faith". Not so. That is what prophecies are for. To prove God is real. You want an example? Here..
The prohet Isaiah writing about 700 b.c names cyrus the king who will say to Jerusalem that it shall be built and that the Temple foundation shall be laid (Isaiah 44:28;54:1)100 years later the Temple was destroyed by King Nebuchadnezzar. After Jerusalem was taken by the Babylonians, it was conquered by the Persians in about 539 b.c. Shortly after that a persian king named Cyrus gave to the decree to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. Research that Fate and you will find it to be true. So a prophecy by Isaiah 100 years befor Cyrus was even born. Prophecies like these are what God wants us to use to prove Himself. But Im sure you will find a way to not believe that too even though it has been proven historically.
And I guess you just missed the part about the sediment rock and how that has been dismissed as an accurate source for aging the earth. I read your response and the fact of earthly catastrophes is an easy explanation for your valley theory.
And on a personal level; no, I would never give money to Israel to hope for Armageddon to get here quicker. Whoever does that is just crazy. And no I wouldnt go kill someone because they did something against God. God can handle his own battles. Jesus declared a new commandment that we should love one another as we love ourselves. You also mentioned why God couldnt destroy cities on His own and had to use the Hebrews. Think about that......Sodom and Gomorrah???
Well, its been nice but I have to leave it at that. Im not a crazy Christian that you see on TV sending money to Israel hoping for a quicker Judgement Day. God will do that on His own. I just live my life in a manner consistent with Gods will and must defend His name. Im not led with blind faith as you may think because I once too questioned God over and over again until I found truth in His ways and truth in His prophetical accuricies. I hope you can find that too Fate. Ill pray for you. And no matter how much you might hate me because of my views I will keep you in prayer. I know you dont believe in that, but for me to do that act should be a sign of respect and love for you as a human. Take care.
Ok so every proof I bring you gets thrown out like I am just accepting what some dummy had to say. So be it. I guess having a logical debate with someone so hard headed as yourself is not logical. I gave it a shot though. Ive come through with answers to your every question but all you hear is yourself. I know now no matter what I say or what proof I have that you will not hear. That's fine. I made my points. I hope you can find fullfillment in your life not knowing about the true God. But just so you know too, geology is science. Thats just pretty basic info for ya. I had fun debating but then you got too personal. Two words: ANGER MANAGEMENT! Later homie. Take care.
---First off, there are two forms of earth aging sciences. Evolutionists and Creationist. Neither one has come to a specific conclusion and as a matter of fact the evolutionists theories are starting to become more and more discredited as time goes on. Yes, I will give examples because you shouldnt take my word for it.---
Creation science is bunk. And "earth aging science" is not evolution. Its geology.
---First, evolutionist think the world is some 14 billion years old only due to their belief in "particles-to-people" theory.---
Hahahaha. Your ignorance is evident. Scientists do not "believe" anything. That is your first assumption that is causing you to accept creationist bunk.
---For us as humans it would take billions of years to evolve from particles to people.---
And you know this because...?
---Scientific methods for aging have been based upon thicknesses of sedimentary rocks. This method of aging has been proven inaccurate as recent tests have shown that sedimentary rock can build up faster than previously thought. For example:The Mount St. Helens eruption in Washington state produced 25 feet (7.6 meters) of finely layered sediment in a single afternoon. Any catastrophes occuring during the history of the world would throw off the method of rock sedimentation for use as an aging tool. Earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruption, etc. Here are a couple more examples to show how evolutionists scientific methods have came crashing in on them.---
Do rocks layer in all directions? In other words, if you had a valley and something like Mt St. Helens sent mud and sediment into it, would the layers be horizontal or layer the sides of the hills equally? Would I find, say, a foot of sediment on the sides of the valley AND on the floor of the valley? Look here to see an example of this: http://www.dnr.state.md.us/publiclands/western/sidelinghill.html. Science says the sediment was layered horizontally and then pushed into the form of a valley and hills over millions of years. Creationists say the layers formed inside a valley that was filled with sediment equally on the bottom and sides, then erosion made the hill. Somehow sediment was layered equally on the sides and bottom of the previously existing valley. That's physically impossible so I ask you, why does creation science say something that is physically impossible?
---Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years—certainly not the 65 million years from when evolutionists think the last dinosaur lived.---
Got a reference for that? And if it were true why do you think it couldn;t last more than a few thousand years? You are making a lot of assumptions, or should I say, accepting a lot of bunk.
---The moon is slowly receding from earth at about 1-1/2 inches (4cm) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance. This gives a maximum possible age of the moon—not the actual age. This is far too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks).---
Got a reference for that?
---Just a few examples of how you cant depend on science for all your answers.---
And when you break you leg or have a disease where do you go to be healed? To church, a house of God, or a hospital, a house of science?
---Creationists(believers in the Bible) agree that they cannot scientifically prove the world is less than 10,000 years old, but either can evolutionists. All creationists can prove is that the methods evolutionists use are not accurate and not even close. Creationists ultimately date the earth using the chronology of the Bible. This is because they believe that this is an accurate eyewitness account of world history, which can be shown to be consistent with much data.---
Eye witness? Who was the eye wit... , oh, I guess you mean God. When you have a guy with superpowers on your side its sorta hard to argue with you. Let me ask you this: Do you believe the scientific evidence for a big bang is real evidence of the creation of the universe (let there be light)? If so how do you explain that the light which proves the big bang is 14 billion years old? If the earth is only 6000 years old we could not see that old light. Did God wave a wand and just do it to confuse us?
Any other questions Fate? Please let me know.
Do you realize that when you say creationists believe in the bible and start with its beliefs as true and work from there that you have just defined what science calls bias and is a reason to not trust experimental results, even results that may be real? Science is more than just getting the correct answer. Its about proving the correct answer. Do you understand the difference?
David wrote:
---First of all your first problem is that your knowledge is based upon a Roman Catholic Church tradition. I feel like we could not even begin to debate certain issues due to the fact that the Catholic Church is NOT Christianity.---
No? Do you agree with the results of the First Council of Nicaea? That was the Catholic church resolving many issues christianity had up until they resolved them in Nicea. I always found it interesting that in 325AD christianity was in crisis because the message was muddled requiring the council to accept some concepts and toss others to avoid conflicts. A very interesting way to determine a religious doctrine developed three centuries earlier, accepting the writings of only four apostles, while other apostles writings that were in conflict were tossed, never to be read in church again.
---The catholic church is the reason for the perversion of Christianity. Cm'on, who asks a man (pope) for forgiveness. And upon what authority does he have for this kind of act except his own. No where in the Bible does it say that a man can forgive sins. Only God.---
Oh I agree. Though the catholics will tell you that the pope and his priests can forgive sin in the name of God but it will be up to God to actually hand out the forgiveness.
---One thing I find offensive Fate is the fact that you would think I would want to blow up NYC to please God.---
Well no, it was more of a question. There are christians who will kill and in some cases consider anything they think God would want. Some have killed abortion doctors for example. If you believed that God spoke to you and asked you to kill someone, and you really believed it was God speaking, would you do it? A better question would be: Would you give money to Israel so Israel could survive as a nation since Israel is required for prophecies to be realized? I find either one as psychotic as bin Laden killing thousands in God's name. Do you?
---I used that as a metaphor. That is not a real prediction I am trying to make but the equivolent to many prophecies fortold in the Bible several hundred and some several thousand years before they happen! Don't make me out to be the evil one here.---
Predictions in the bible? Hahahahahahaha! Name one. And no twisting now. Does it say for example that a leader of meek intelligence would lie to launch a war in Mesopetamia in 2003 from the other side of the earth?
---Both the God of the OT and the God (Jesus) of the NT proclaim the destruction of the wicked. And both declare their love and EXTREME patience with humanity to repent from their sins.---
Then why not let God do his own dirty work? It seems the Hebrews needed to do it for him. How convenient. Do you know Moses ordered prisoners of a whole town killed, men women and children? He did this AFTER the Hebrew soldiers took pity on them and spared their lives. You see, "God" wanted them to die. The Hebrews of course obeyed Moses' orders (Numbers 31:16-18). My question to you was whether you would also obey God's orders if you believed they came from God, as the Hebrews believed Moses' orders came from God. Here is where you can read a few more examples of God being a nice guy: http://nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible3.htm#kill-man-woman-infant. I'd really like to know whether you would harm innocents in the name of God and if not, why you would disobey God?
---Concerning Islam compared to Christianity:
The two are so close in comparison to the lame of knowledge but their purposes are so far apart. Islam even teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin and will return for a second coming to rule the world for a thousand years. Muhammed basiclly ripped off Christianity but kept and added parts he liked.---
Sort of like the early christians ripped off judaism? Do you feel other christian churches ripped of the catholics who maintained christianity, developed it through the council of Nicea until the protestant reformation hundreds of years later? Please tell me what you think is the true christian church. I'll bet its the one's your parents belonged to.
---There are no known prochecies in the Koran.---
So?
---Prophecy is important to prove that God is real.---
Prove? I thought faith meant something could not be proved? I thought belief in God was not based on proofs but on acceptance. So you have proof? Bring it forward, please. You would be the first. If anyone told you there was proof of God's existence, they lied to you.
---Muhammed had a couple of visions and created his own religion that was followed so closely due to cultural similarities.---
Were his visions from God? Can people have visions that do not come from God? How could you tell one from another? Why do you trust some and not Mohammed's?
---The Islamic god Allah cannot offer love, compassion and mercy like the True Christian God because Muslims seperate God from themselves believing God is too powerful for Him to care about us but rely on the teachings of one Muhammed.---
I'll have to trust you on that one. But so what. Why is your belief true and their's wrong? You have proof one is true and the other wrong? Please share it. You're once again sounding like the result must be a loving God so anything that supports it is correct. In the real world that is called a "heavy bias". What if God wanted people dead? What if humans really were created and lived in the garden of Eden as immortal by a benevolent God, but the your God came along tossed them out and today we face death? I know, its not in the bible, but just consider an evil nasty God, one that has fun torturing us humans. Can't imagine it? Ask yourself why you can't. The Greeks could.
---So once again I brought you proof that is undeniable. Please respond this time with some proof of your own instead of the constant human reasoning.---
Sorry to be using reason. I thought God wanted us to use our reason, but maybe when asking tough questions you don't want to hear them. I asked you a question in my last posting that you have not answered. Is the earth 6000 years old as the bible says? If you believe that is true how do you handle the scientific disagreement
with that while accepting the archeological science you say proves the bible? Please answer this and feel free to use your human reasoning.
And you have brought NO proof that is undeniable. You have brought no proof at all. Just statements that your belief in the bible is the correct one because you say the bible is the word of God and is therefore correct. That's what is called circular logic.
I responded to you below once already but didnt have time to respond about the age of this world. Since we are dealing with scientific matters this this might be a long response. Here goes......
First off, there are two forms of earth aging sciences. Evolutionists and Creationist. Neither one has come to a specific conclusion and as a matter of fact the evolutionists theories are starting to become more and more discredited as time goes on. Yes, I will give examples because you shouldnt take my word for it.
First, evolutionist think the world is some 14 billion years old only due to their belief in "particles-to-people" theory. For us as humans it would take billions of years to evolve from particles to people. Scientific methods for aging have been based upon thicknesses of sedimentary rocks. This method of aging has been proven inaccurate as recent tests have shown that sedimentary rock can build up faster than previously thought. For example:The Mount St. Helens eruption in Washington state produced 25 feet (7.6 meters) of finely layered sediment in a single afternoon. Any catastrophes occuring during the history of the world would throw off the method of rock sedimentation for use as an aging tool. Earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruption, etc. Here are a couple more examples to show how evolutionists scientific methods have came crashing in on them.
Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years—certainly not the 65 million years from when evolutionists think the last dinosaur lived.
The moon is slowly receding from earth at about 1-1/2 inches (4cm) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance. This gives a maximum possible age of the moon—not the actual age. This is far too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks).
Just a few examples of how you cant depend on science for all your answers. Creationists(believers in the Bible) agree that they cannot scientifically prove the world is less than 10,000 years old, but either can evolutionists. All creationists can prove is that the methods evolutionists use are not accurate and not even close. Creationists ultimately date the earth using the chronology of the Bible. This is because they believe that this is an accurate eyewitness account of world history, which can be shown to be consistent with much data.
Someday, the world is going to end, if by end we all mean "become unfit for human habitation. The sun, and for that matter the whole universe, are going to run out of energy and darken (over a period of billions of years). Humanity will survive to see one or both of these only with unfathomably good fortune. I believe ABC had a program on this several months ago. They rated nuclear war and environmental change as the biggest threat to our ability to live here. The program included a comment from no less than Stephen Hawking, who publicly advocated searching the universe for potential new homes.
Of the texts generally recognized as "apocalyptic," i've only read one -the Book of Revelation. Some of the things it describes, like dragons and the Beast and various symbolically numbered things seem a bit outside the realm of strictly rational, literal belief, even if they do have symbolic significance for some believers.
What is beleivable is the reference to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. This is clearly a metaphor, but it may well prove accurate. What are four things that can and do kill huge numbers of people? How about war, famine, pestilence and (rather redundantly) death? These are often related to each other, one resulting in the other and vice versa, and if they ever come to a head at one time, humanity could be in big trouble.
The reference to people who "make their robes white in the blood of the Lamb" is rather plausible as well. Would some section of the world not be expected to seek spiritual refuge (of one sort or another) in a more-chaotic-than-ever world?
I'm not implying in any way that you need a Divine revelation to think any of this up (although with some of the more phantasmagoric stuff... I don't know what was going on in the author's brain, to be sure). Rather or not you put any stock in the text as a predictor of coming events, it can still serve as a warning, and a push to look critically at your life. War, famine, pestilence and death threaten every person, all the time. Is the world ending? Yep. Your world and my world are all going to end in a relatively short number of years. We may not all die in a big fiery apocalypse, but we're all going to die, sooner or later. One might view the book of Revelation as an allegory for a single human life - our worlds are always falling apart. It predicts a positive final outcome, out of all the chaos and tragedy we endure, if we live the right way (it does this to the exclusion of non-Christians, a particular point which I, being a Jew, must quibble with).
First post on here, awaiting the hellfire from believers and atheists alike =P
Grow up please - the world is what we make of it. I'm just scared that these fairy stories will lead some of us to destroy it on the basis of pleasing an invisible friend.
If I had a choice to leave all the religious believers behind on this planet and set up camp somewhere else in the multiverse alongside fellow secular humanists and atheists, I would feel far safer in the knowledge that any cataclysmic event bringing about the end of our species would be simply random bad "luck" or bad planning.
And if God does exist in any form whatsoever, on past performance I gladly reject any authority claimed on its behalf.
Thanks for writing back. I'm glad you have some knowledge of the subject except the fact that you continually use your own reasoning as your evidence.
First of all your first problem is that your knowledge is based upon a Roman Catholic Church tradition. I feel like we could not even begin to debate certain issues due to the fact that the Catholic Church is NOT Christianity. The catholic church is the reason for the perversion of Christianity. Cm'on, who asks a man (pope) for forgiveness. And upon what authority does he have for this kind of act except his own. No where in the Bible does it say that a man can forgive sins. Only God.
One thing I find offensive Fate is the fact that you would think I would want to blow up NYC to please God. I used that as a metaphor. That is not a real prediction I am trying to make but the equivolent to many prophecies fortold in the Bible several hundred and some several thousand years before they happen! Don't make me out to be the evil one here.
Concerning the destuction of many civilization by Gods order: Ezekiel 18:23 "Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked...and not rather that he turn from his ways and live?" God is a God of love but also a God of judgement. Even Jesus said in Matthew 10:34 about the purpose of His mission. "Think not that I came to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace but the sword." Both the God of the OT and the God (Jesus) of the NT proclaim the destruction of the wicked. And both declare their love and EXTREME patience with humanity to repent from their sins.
Concerning Islam compared to Christianity:
The two are so close in comparison to the lame of knowledge but their purposes are so far apart. Islam even teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin and will return for a second coming to rule the world for a thousand years. Muhammed basiclly ripped off Christianity but kept and added parts he liked. There are no known prochecies in the Koran. Prophecy is important to prove that God is real. Muhammed had a couple of visions and created his own religion that was followed so closely due to cultural similarities. The Islamic god Allah cannot offer love, compassion and mercy like the True Christian God because Muslims seperate God from themselves believing God is too powerful for Him to care about us but rely on the teachings of one Muhammed.
So once again I brought you proof that is undeniable. Please respond this time with some proof of your own instead of the constant human reasoning.
My comparison of an IBM stock fall to the destruction of NYC was that both are predictions. Are you saying you can see the future? My point was that many people, religious and not have predicted the future.
You assume I do not know who Jesus was or what the bible says. My religious training is extensive in the Roman Catholic tradition. The inconsistencies in the bible and the bible's outright statements that God considers slavery normal, beating slaves normal (except killing them, that's a no-no), genocide is ok and in some cases required by God, and many more examples, is more than troubling to me. You only need to look at how christians act, in many cases while quoting the bible, to understand that the bible is not the good book you think it is. If you have read it, you know the parts I'm talking about and have been used to justify genocide, murder, racism and many other vile acts against other people. Our president and his lying followers is just one small example.
I would be the first to say that Jesus was an awesome guy, more so if you consider he was just another guy, not the son of God with super powers. His speaking truth to power is refreshing and I think that's why he had so many followers. He basically was saying through his teachings that the Hebrew God was not what the Torah said he was. Instead of the God of the Jews who went to war with the Hebrews, he was a God who loves his children, all people, even sinners. This new paradigm is why Jesus had followers.
Your claim that archeology proves the bible is overstated. Because some parts of the bible have some archaeological evidence is no reason to take the rest of it, including the interpretations of the apostles, as, well, gospel. Many parts of the Quran have also been shown to be archaeologically accurate. Does that prove that Mohammed rose to heaven at God's hand?
You acceptance that your God can command followers to go into cities and destroy all its inhabitants, including children, is chilling and reminicent of bin Laden's logic at killing thousands, including children, as God's will. Religion has been used by man to justify wonderful things, and horrific things. The problem I see in believers like yourself is that if you become convinced that NYC should be destroyed by 2010 because God wills it, you just might try to make it happen to please God. That is more than just wrong, its psychotic.
Lets start with some basic beliefs. Do you believe the earth is about 6,000 years old as the bible says? If so, how do you handle the scientific disagreement with that when you accept scientific findings that agree with the bible?
Im sorry I didnt want to write an essay like yourself. In response, you obviously have no knowledge of the matters at hand. First of all comparing the annihilation of the U.S. to an IBM stock is way too drastic. Nice try though. But in the OT God declared several cities which at the time were cities in comparible to New York and other major metropolitans of our time. Ex. Tyre, Sidon...etc. The thought of these cities becoming destroyed and proclaimed either uninhabited or never to be a flourishing city again is the equivolent of us saying New York would be destroyed and never inhabited ever again. But yeah, go ahead and reduce your metaphor to an "IBM stock???"
Secondly, Jesus IS God. Genesis 1:26..."Let us make mankind in OUR image, in OUR likeness."
Therefore who's we? Jesus has been and always will be. That is the doctine of the trinity. He called himself the Son because He was in the flesh. There are plenty more I could go into about that one but maybe you should search for that yourself. I guarantee you won't be upset about what you find.
Third, I think you have been misinformed about the historical accuracies of the Bible. Archaeoligically (hope i spelled that right :) the Bible has been proven over and over again only to be discredited by those who follow their own humanistic reasoning, such as yourself. And as far as God commanding the Israelites to destroy cities and kill all who were in them; Yep, that's what he did. Sounds bad I know. But what you fail to realize is that God gave everyone several chances to repent before judgement was released upon them. Noah preached to his fellow citizens for 150 years before God brought the floods. Plenty of chances + no repentence= judgement. It's too bad Fate that you cannot and will never be able to come up with any archaelogical evidence or be able to disprove the Bible with an historical inaccuracy EVER. All you can use to debate is your simple human reasoning. How can one understand spiritual topics if one is not of a spiritual essence. Instead you resort to mortal reasoning which brings you to unintelligent human reasoning.
And end time prophecies were written not just 400 years after the death of Christ but through the many prophets of the OT, Ex. Daniel which was written somewhere in the 628 B.C. range. Its amazing huh Kate when you recieve the facts. But please do not take my word for it because I know you won't. Please investigate the matters yourself in an open minded manner and I pray that you can know Christ like I do. I think you have been led improperly in your beliefs. Especially in how Christ can change your life. I hope you can challenge Jesus and find out the Truth. And obviously according to your response you have questions not answers. Ask me anything and I promise a return with the Truth so that you may experience life with Christ. God bless you Fate.
Im sorry I didnt want to write an essay like yourself. In response, you obviously have no knowledge of the matters at hand. First of all comparing the annihilation of the U.S. to an IBM stock is way too drastic. Nice try though. But in the OT God declared several cities which at the time were cities in comparible to New York and other major metropolitans of our time. Ex. Tyre, Sidon...etc. The thought of these cities becoming destroyed and proclaimed either uninhabited or never to be a flourishing city again is the equivolent of us saying New York would be destroyed and never inhabited ever again. But yeah, go ahead and reduce your metaphor to an "IBM stock???"
Secondly, Jesus IS God. Genesis 1:26..."Let us make mankind in OUR image, in OUR likeness."
Therefore who's we? Jesus has been and always will be. That is the doctine of the trinity. He called himself the Son because He was in the flesh. There are plenty more I could go into about that one but maybe you should search for that yourself. I guarantee you won't be upset about what you find.
Third, I think you have been misinformed about the historical accuracies of the Bible. Archaeoligically (hope i spelled that right :) the Bible has been proven over and over again only to be discredited by those who follow their own humanistic reasoning, such as yourself. And as far as God commanding the Israelites to destroy cities and kill all who were in them; Yep, that's what he did. Sounds bad I know. But what you fail to realize is that God gave everyone several chances to repent before judgement was released upon them. Noah preached to his fellow citizens for 150 years before God brought the floods. Plenty of chances + no repentence= judgement. It's too bad Fate that you cannot and will never be able to come up with any archaelogical evidence or be able to disprove the Bible with an historical inaccuracy EVER. All you can use to debate is your simple human reasoning. How can one understand spiritual topics if one is not of a spiritual essence. Instead you resort to mortal reasoning which brings you to unintelligent human reasoning.
And end time prophecies were written not just 400 years after the death of Christ but through the many prophets of the OT, Ex. Daniel which was written somewhere in the 628 B.C. range. Its amazing huh Kate when you recieve the facts. But please do not take my word for it because I know you won't. Please investigate the matters yourself in an open minded manner and I pray that you can know Christ like I do. I think you have been led improperly in your beliefs. Especially in how Christ can change your life. I hope you can challenge Jesus and find out the Truth. And obviously according to your response you have questions not answers. Ask me anything and I promise a return with the Truth so that you may experience life with Christ. God bless you Kate.
Not a good way to start off a conversation David. I'm raising my shield...
---All there ever is is an ignorant non-logical, no proof answer to your thinkings.---
Something tells me I'm about to hear the same from you. Now I'm unsheathing my sword...
---Of course God exists and that God would be Jesus.---
Of course... no proof needed, right? Just proof He doesn't exist. Nice debating position to be in, making the other guy prove a negative. Must be nice to frame the debating rules, you can pontificate but I must prove things.
---The Bible has been considered a credible source for centuries with historical accuracies beyond any other form of literature.---
Considered credible by who? Christians? Hahahahahahaha, great logic. Why not just argue that English is the one true language because it has worked so well for those who continue to find it so useful? Everyone should learn English right? And don't forget the Quran is just as historically accurate if not more. What does that prove? Maybe you should convert to Islam?
---If I told you that the U.S would no longer exist after 2010 and it happened would you listen to what I say?---
And if I said IBM stock was about to take a dive, and it did, would you annoint me as a saint? Predicting the future is not a holy act. Christ and his followers did a pretty poor job of it themselves.
---Well, God did that in the Old Testament on several occasions but you still fail to listen to REASON.---
God said slaves should be beaten in the OT. God said for the Hebrews to destroy whole towns, men, women and children. God said a lot of things. Do you believe them without doubt? Do you own slaves which God said was ok? Do you beat your slaves?
---The Christian God through Jesus is the only God in any religion that demands that we TRY to prove Him wrong with the same conclusion for anyone who knows the Bible historically and culturally that Jesus is God.---
More logic? If you accept Jesus is God, then Jesus is God. What do you say when you read in the NT that Jesus never said he was the son of God. Was Jesus a liar?
---Now for these all to be true we have to say that the end times according to many writers of the Bible are true.---
Yes, if you have a belief that the bible is completely true, then the bible is completely true including the end times which were written about 400 years after Christ died. I understand that part of your "logic". Belief trumps reason even if the belief was written down some 4 centuries after Christ died. But if your belief is absolute, what about owning and beating slaves? God allows it right?
---You cannot believe in what parts of the Bible you want and try to discredit the others.---
Then why don't you think slavery is ok? Or maybe you do...
---It is so much easier to believe that there is no God.---
Do you believe in no Ganesh? Do you believe in no Zeus, no Thor? You'll probably say its not a matter of belief, and I would agree with you. Belief is positive. You believe in God, I do not believe in God, but I do not "believe that there is no God". Think about it and it will make sense.
---That would make life in this world so much easier but instead I choose to "build my treasures in heaven."---
Ah heaven. The reward of every religion past and present, or did you think the Hebrew God invented it? Ever read the book of the Dead? Heaven is the carrot of all religions. Guess what is the stick? Carrots and sticks are used to enforce a person's actions and beliefs, like using rewards and punishments to keep your dog's behavior the way you want it. Let me ask you this ... Do you accept God or fear God? I would be much happier if God was enforcing these carrots and sticks, but He is not, it is people called priests and rabbis.
---We have only a short time here compared to eternity after the physical death.---
What's wrong with you people? All there ever is is an ignorant non-logical, no proof answer to your thinkings. Of course God exists and that God would be Jesus. The Bible has been considered a credible source for centuries with historical accuracies beyond any other form of literature. If I told you that the U.S would no longer exist after 2010 and it happened would you listen to what I say? Well, God did that in the Old Testament on several occasions but you still fail to listen to REASON. The Christian God through Jesus is the only God in any religion that demands that we TRY to prove Him wrong with the same conclusion for anyone who knows the Bible historically and culturally that Jesus is God. Now for these all to be true we have to say that the end times according to many writers of the Bible are true. You cannot believe in what parts of the Bible you want and try to discredit the others. It is so much easier to believe that there is no God. That would make life in this world so much easier but instead I choose to "build my treasures in heaven." We have only a short time here compared to eternity after the physical death.
Mo wrote:
---to those who have all the reson of the world,tuck all your reason toghether and try to creat just one atom of the air that you reasonably breath,or bring the rain that grow food for your sustanance,or use your reason paradigm to create your own smart universe.---
Atoms and their components are created in particle accelerators all the time, including particles created from "nothing" (the vacuum). Here a nice article describing something people made but it seems God could not make, antimatter atoms: http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=345336
Rain has been made since around 1950 through cloud seeding. Piece of cake!
Science has not created a smart universe, whatever that is, but certainly has moved our knowledge and understanding of the universe to the point where the weather can now be predicted relative accurately 10 days in advance. Do you think the weatherman goes to the local church to get that forcast? Where do you go when you've had a life threatening accident, your church or the hospital? Do you want your food blessed or have it scrutinized by the FDA testing? Do you pray during a power outage that the power be restored or do you call your local electric company?
And this is something I've always wondered about: prayer. Do you pray and if so do you really think your prayers get God's special attention so he will do you a favor? I find it amazing that christians believe they can summon the power of God. I remember Robertson asking people to pray that a hurricane's track change. Why would God respond to prayer? Is He your servant?
Hate to splill the beans, but all belivers are histoy. Doomed. As are those who don't believe.
I have this on good authority. Look up. To God a squid is an important as we are. So are ants, whales, a pine tree, whatever. God does not score His life beyond what each contributes to the whole.
Unfortuately we humans are on the way out. We deract from substaing and nurting life. We'e failed. We're no longer needed. And we can try to protect ourselves with a myth of a minor preacher strung up on a cross.
We detract from the whole.
Was that minor preacher strung up on the cross important to God? No. In fact, God knew nothing about that, and he would never care in any case. It was a politcal killing. The same sort of things we currently at war against.
There was no Jesus who came back from the dead. That legend proceeded him by about 2100 years. Virgin birth, maybe 3000 years of recorded history. Rising from the grave? How far do you want to for that myth
It' too easy and it records the inseurity of makind.
Hate to splill the beans, but all belivers are histoy. Doomed. As are those who don't believe.
I have this on good authority. Look up. To God a squid is an important as we are. So are ants, whales, a pine tree, whatever. God does not score His life beyond what each contributes to the whole.
Unfortuately we humans are on the way out. We deract from substaing and nurting life. We'e failed. We're no longer needed. And we can try to protect ourselves with a myth of a minor preacher strung up on a cross.
We detract from the whole.
Was that minor preacher strung up on the cross important to God? No. In fact, God knew nothing about that, and he would never care in any case. It was a politcal killing. The same sort of things we currently at war against.
There was no Jesus who came back from the dead. That legend proceeded him by about 2100 years. Virgin birth, maybe 3000 years of recorded history. Rising from the grave? How far do you want to for that myth
It' too easy and it records the inseurity of makind.
Mo: "if you fail ,just tuck your reason in your scientific legs and make a good U turn"
Frankly, this is pretty silly. Basically what you are saying is that because humans can't do everything yet, there must be a God. Two hundred years ago, you might have said "try to fly through the sky with the birds or travel to the moon and look down upon the green Earth". Now it's creating atoms and bringing the rain. If we figure out how to do that, what will you use?
Anyway, we don't need to make it rain on demand. Thousands of years ago we invented irrigation, which is much more reliable anyway. :)
Mo: "and admit that the allmighty creator exist,then humble your self and reason and listen to what he tell you, above all he is your creator and master."
The Bible taught that Jesus returned in that first generation of christians, marked by the collision of the "nations" gathered with Rome and the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70 C.E. There will be no more "appearances" at some supposed "end of the world." Apocalypticism has been a thorn in the side of Christian theology, and it is high time we de-eschatologize our conversation with it. The world would be a much better place with "end time" views, whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian.
The Bible taught that Jesus returned in that generation of christian, marked by the collision of the "nations" gathered with Rome and the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70 C.E. There will be no more "appearances" at some supposed "end of the world." Apocalypticism has been a thorn in the side of Christian theology, and it is high time we de-eschatologize our conversation with it. The world would be a much better place with "end time" views, whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian.
Mo wrote:
---if you fail ,just tuck your reason in your scientific legs and make a good U turn and admit that the allmighty creator exist,then humble your self and reason and listen to what he tell you, above all he is your creator and master.---
This logic has been used to allow the murder of non-believers, the demonizing and thus hatred of those outside a religion, and to take away a person's human rights. Once you believe that YOUR God is MY God, you begin to build walls, which causes fear resulting in hatred resulting in doing things against your better judgement to protect the religion, not to protect yourself. Your logic that not being able to create an atom means God exists is as simplistic and brainless as me saying that since you cannot create an atom the flying spaghetti monster exists. But that would be silly right? You have no idea how insane you sound.
Consider following my religion: Last Thursdayism
In Last Thursdayism we believe the universe and everything in it including ourselves was created, by God, last Thursday. Your memories, your job, your family, everything was created in place last Thursday. Next Thursday (tomorrow), the universe will end and judgement day will be upon us. You have until then to abide by the religious beliefs that you were created with and sell all your possessions as your memory says Christ said you should and give them to the poor. Failure to do so by Thursday at midnight means you will not go to heaven. You might say starlight is hitting the earth from billions of lightyears away so the earth is older than one week, but I'd just say the light was created in transit. God makes anything possible. So, I say to you:
just tuck your reason in your scientific legs and make a good U turn and admit that the allmighty creator exist,then humble your self and reason and listen to what he tell you, sell your possessions and wait until midnight on Thursday for salvation. For above all he is your creator and master and failure to abide by Last Thursdayism means your soul will be forever damned. If you don't believe it, prove me wrong.
What is very disturbing is the pre-mature ending of the lives (world) of Shiites by Sunnis and vice-versa on a 24/7 basis both following the dictates of the same book. And yet Victoria and other Muslims never condemn these actions or their "good" book. Such utter stupidity!!!, a stupidity that threatens to involve the world in a potential "ending it all" scenario.
It is time for Muslims to rewrite their book!!!!! Maybe ethanol will force their hands.
the end of faith=end of life .
rise of faith = rise of life .
to those who have all the reson of the world,tuck all your reason toghether and try to creat just one atom of the air that you reasonably breath,or bring the rain that grow food for your sustanance,or use your reason paradigm to create your own smart universe.
if you fail ,just tuck your reason in your scientific legs and make a good U turn and admit that the allmighty creator exist,then humble your self and reason and listen to what he tell you, above all he is your creator and master.
rebbeling would not take you any where ,you live in his earth that he created,and under the sky that he created,and breath the air that he created ,and devour and soak the food and water that he created ,the brain that you reason with he also created,so no escap .
I just find it very amusing that christian America laughs when Iran's president Ahmadinejad says the Hidden Imam is about to appear, a Shia belief not unlike the return of Christ. Why do they laugh? Because its a silly notion, except when you ask whether its as silly as Christ's second coming, then it turns serious. They cannot be compared. The delusion of the Hidden Imam cannot be compared with the certainty of the second coming. It is like a crazy person who think's they are Napoleon laughing at another crazy person who thinks they are Henry VIII. It just baffles me how a thinking person can live with the delusion and obvious inconsistancies, and even go to war to protect the delusion. But maybe that's the issue, thinking is limited in all religions to boundries drawn by the religion, boundries not to be crossed upon pain of hell and damnation.
Many interesting details of the end-times are revealed when a Christian lense is used to examine Judaism; including the new Sanhedrin, the Seven Laws of Noah, and Hasidic Kabbalah. A free consice e-book, "Satan's Hoax," is available by clicking on my name (a link) above. Enjoy and share if you like.
There are several possible perspectives to this question:
1) A question seeking a scientific prognosis upon the planet or universe that we inhabit.
2) Or many more subjective levels of meaning.
-- In that non-scientific, philosophical/religious scope, the "end of the world questions" are similar to "meaning of life" questions, in that some people often presuppose that there is only one, universal, absolutist answer.
One answer may be that the "end of the world" is when one dies. The phenomenonal world which is all that is known to a person dies when that person dies. The meaning of life is similarly large and yet ostensibly personal in scope. There may be many meanings and many ends of the "world."
And yet, there is another aspect -- "End of the world" 'hysteria', where a person or group of people believe an impending end of the world coming in their lifetimes.
Perhaps such people emotionally, subconsciously sense a surging feeling of the mortality and fleeting impermanance of their lives.
Or then again, it is experienced when one is on the verge of revolutionary, internal, psychological change within oneself. A radical transformation of one's inner self is in effect, the death of one's personality and the rebirth of another. The symbolism of this pattern is seen in various religions, and in various rituals.
Such a strong change perhaps could be felt as if the entire world is thundering and transforming, since perception of the world is tied to how the person feels and sees.
Thus the experience or promise of religious rebirth and transformation could be described as an "end of the world" feeling.
If the person is not aware that this feeling is actually, and merely subjective, then it could be felt as if reality is impending upon a world shaking end. Feeling the oncoming encrouchment of radical change, especially within oneself, could be frightening.
Such internal revolution need not be bad, but it does bring to mind "end of the world" cults that have had the misfortune of mistaking their subjective psychologically experienced reality, for absolute reality.
Other examples of the reasoning error where subjective reality is mistaken for universal reality could be when one person strongly believes that his/her subjective perspective, value system, prejudices and fears (including paranoia) should or would apply universally to everyone.
Do you mean the universe will come to an end, or just the planet earth? If you mean the earth then science says "yes", faith says "so what". If you mean the known universe then science says "no?” faith says "so what". If you mean the unknown universe then science says "?", faith says "so what".
However, a few Christians have this thing set on a thirty-year plan with infinite resets. One expires every year, and one is set every year. This process started in Paul's time.
If the question is the earth only, then:
Science says "yes", but gives no date.
Faith says "so what, don't quit your day job".
A few Christians say "Thirty Years".
None can be proven wrong.
However, where in this discussion is the Constitutional issue of imposing the laws of a particular establishment's Articles of Faith upon the rest of us?
---Do you believe the world will come to an end? If so, where, when and what will it look like?---
Please tell me, how do I get a job at the Post where I can ask one question a week, with someone to help me, as a full time job? I hope they're not paying these writers too much. We type away for free. Maybe the Post should let us ask the questions. I'm sure we'd be more intelligent than the ones Meacham and Quinn have been coming up with...
But what the hey, I'll play along. The earth has about 4 billion years left. Around that time the Sun, which is burning hydrogen to helium via nuclear fusion and helium up to heavier elements until it makes iron. That's where the nuclear burning stops. Iron, being heaviest and cannot be fused into a heavier element, sinks to the Suns core where is accumulates, the iron core will get bigger and bigger. The lighter elements are still burning is a shell around the iron core. As this shell expands due the Sun's expanding iron core, the Sun's surface gets hotter and will expand. It will get so big that it will engulf all the inner planets, including earth, but probably not as far out as Jupiter. No more earth. As the shell gets bigger and thus further away from the Sun's center, the nuclear fusion, which relies on temperature and gravity, decreases and the nuclear burning will eventually stop. The Sun, which is now a red giant star with a surface out past where Mars used to be begins to collapse due to the heat from the nuclear burning being gone. The Sun's gas will collapse. The gas will slam into the iron core and possibly cause a nova (not a super nova, the Sun's too small to make a super nova). The nova will blow off most of the outer gas leaving a small dense Sun, a white dwarf, not much bigger than the earth, which will continue to shine from residual heat. But your decendents probably won't get to see this since the earth was vaporized when the Sun expanded out to our orbit. If they learned to live on Jupitor, the nova will blow it apart. They'll need to leave the solar system before the nova. Start praying that NASA, in the next 3.9 billion years, can get us off this rock and onto another planet, one that has a few billion years of lifetime before its Sun goes nova. That or sit back and relax and let your kids worry about it, you know, like they will have to worry about the national debt, social security and medicare.
Our culture seems happy to push off crises to the next generation. Why is this one, even if the evangelicals have it right, any worse? At least with their version of the world ending they get to go to heaven. Maybe they want the world to end sooner so they won't have to pay their high mortgages, fund medicare and social security, or pay for their kids college. If you ask me, believing in a God-driven end of the world is wishful thinking by a bunch of cowards afraid of working to make the future better for us and our children. Go to church and pray for your soul ... I'll recycle, encourage less use of oil, and go to work to make the world a better place for my children and for yours too.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are forms of socially sanctioned lunacy, their fundamental tenents and rituals irrational, archaic and more importantly when it comes to matters of humanity’s long-term survival, mutually incompatible. There are names for people who have beliefs for which there is no rational justification. When their beliefs are extremely common, we call them ‘religious’; otherwise, they are likely to be called ‘mad,’ ‘psychotic’ or ‘delusional.’ ‘’ To cite but one example: ‘’Jesus Christ—who, as it turns out, was born of a virgin, cheated death and rose bodily into the heavens—can now be eaten in the form of a cracker. A few Latin words spoken over your favorite Burgundy, and you can drink his blood as well. Is there any doubt that a lone subscriber to these beliefs would be considered mad?’’ The danger of religious faith is that it allows otherwise normal human beings to reap the fruits of madness and consider them holy.’’
Criticizing a person’s faith is currently taboo in every corner of our culture. On this subject, liberals and conservatives have reached a rare consensus: religious beliefs are simply beyond the scope of rational discourse. Criticizing a person’s ideas about God and the afterlife is thought to be impolitic in a way that criticizing his ideas about physics or history is not.’’
A zippered-lip policy would be fine, a pleasant display of the neighborly tolerance that we consider part of an advanced democracy, if not for the mortal perils inherent in strong religious faith. The terrorists who flew jet planes into the World Trade Center believed in the holiness of their cause. The Christian apocalypticists who are willing to risk a nuclear conflagration in the Middle East for the sake of expediting the second coming of Christ believe in the holiness of their cause. Such fundamentalists are not misinterpreting their religious texts or ideals. They are not defaming or distorting their faith. To the contrary, they are taking their religion seriously, attending to the holy texts on which their faith is built. Unhappily for international community, the Good Books that undergird the world’s major religions are extraordinary anthologies of violence and vengeance, celestial decrees that infidels must die.
In the 21st century when swords have been beaten into megaton bombs, the persistence of ancient, blood-washed theisms that emphasize their singular righteousness and their superiority over competing faiths poses a genuine threat to the future of humanity, if not the biosphere: ‘’We can no longer ignore the fact that billions of our neighbors believe in the metaphysics of martyrdom, or in the literal truth of the book of Revelation,’’ he writes, ‘’because our neighbors are now armed with chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.’’
I have a particular ire for religious moderates, those who ‘’have taken the apparent high road of pluralism, asserting the equal validity of all faiths’’ and who ‘’imagine that the path to peace will be paved once each of us has learned to respect the unjustified beliefs of others.’’ Religious moderates are the ones who thwart all efforts to criticize religious literalism. By preaching tolerance, they become intolerant of any rational discussion of religion and ‘’betray faith and reason equally.’’
The human need for a mystical dimension to life like mysticism and other forms of knowledge, can be approached rationally and explored with the tools of modern neuroscience, without recourse to superstition and credulity.
At this time Islam is the reigning threat to humankind. Much like a gruesome, Inquisition-style Christianity of the 13th century only leads us to believe not all cultures are at the same stage of moral development,’’ I couldn’t help but think of Ann Coulter’s morally developed suggestion that we invade Muslim countries, kill their leaders and convert their citizens to Christianity.
I will say this of Faith: it has been the foundation of every religion, every cult, every sect, every religious terrorist organization that desired to gain advocates whose will greatly exceeded their intelligence. When a religion asks that its followers believe all that it declares, and to do so without evidence, it speaks volumes of the intent and meaning of that religion. These churches, temples and mosques, they will keep their followers in the shadows of millennium past. Evolution is still howled as the great enemy of faith. It simply has the greatest following of scientists and evidence. It's not scientifically that any religion has ever tried to debunk Evolution. They brought forth no evidence. They claimed no new discoveries. Their only tactic was to point to tattered and very old scriptues -- to flip through the pages, and read the rancid words, almost as if they were pure gold. Faith does not require investigation, or evidence, or demonstration, or observation, or logical deductions. It simply requires that a person believe, in spite of what evidence may say: it requires that a person blindfolds themselves when demonstration is shown, to use earplugs when anyone speaks of logic, and to turn away at every reason for them to believe what Faith tells them is wrong. Those cults and sects which have utilized violence for the realization of their apocalyptic future -- they required nothing but the willpower and a great deal of Faith.
Tim, This is only a discussion. When you close your mind to other ideas of thought and surround your self with like-minded thinking, solutions rarely present themselves.
Actually, the world is going to end when the Vogons destroy the Earth to make way for an intergalactic superhighway. Didn't you get the warnings from the dolphins?
What a farce, is this discussion supposed to be 'fair and balanced'? You have a Jewish religious thinker, and Muslim one, an anti-christian one, and even the Christian one says that the ware in Iraq is caused by Christian (NOT Muslim, just Christian) religious fundamentalism. No reason for me as a Christian to read on! Obviously, my views are not part of this discussion.
What a farce, is this discussion supposed to be 'fair and balanced'? You have a Jewish religious thinker, and Muslim one, an anti-christian one, and even the Christian one says that the ware in Iraq is caused by religious fundamentalism. No reason for me as a Christian to read on! Obviously, my views are not part of this discussion.
I think the world will end as we know it, but I dont' think it will happen during our lifetime or the next generations lifetime.
As for there being signs to prove that the apocalypse is near, people have been seeing them for thousands of years.During plagues, changes in weather patterns (ie-more frequent and intense storms), wars, etc. The world is constantly changing, inside and out. I think it's terribly ignorant to not see how people and technology have affected some of those changes.
I took an ecology course when i was in college, and we learned so much about how mankind has changed the landscape to suit it's needs, how we cut into the mountains for ore, gold, and other minerals, not to mention blasting them apart to accommodate the railroads, tunnels or just regular roads. We learned how landslides are created by clear cutting and how certain farming methods have depleted our soil of nutrients. We have clogged our waterways for thousands of years with corpses, human waste, chemicals and an outrageous variety of things we consider disposable (diapers, air conditioners, cars, soda and beer cans, just to name a few that i've seen through the years) and now we are harvesting reefs and killing off more sea life than our overfishing has been doing.
Quite frankly, the earth is an ecosystem that can exist without human beings. we are the scourge about it, not the cockroaches, parasites or bacteria that we fear will outsurvive us. humans as a species have proven themselves very innovative, but mostly in ways meant to kill, destroy, maim, change and overcome all that surrounds itself. Does that mean that I've lost hope in it's ability to wake up and smell the coffee, no. Energy never dies, it just changes forms. Hopefully, we humans can take our energy, and turn it into something positive and productive. Proper planning prevents poor performance.
I think the world will end as we know it, but I dont' think it will happen during our lifetime or the next generations lifetime.
As for there being signs to prove that the apocalypse is near, people have been seeing them for thousands of years.During plagues, changes in weather patterns (ie-more frequent and intense storms), wars, etc. The world is constantly changing, inside and out. I think it's terribly ignorant to not see how people and technology have affected some of those changes.
I took an ecology course when i was in college, and we learned so much about how mankind has changed the landscape to suit it's needs, how we cut into the mountains for ore, gold, and other minerals, not to mention blasting them apart to accommodate the railroads, tunnels or just regular roads. We learned how landslides are created by clear cutting and how certain farming methods have depleted our soil of nutrients. We have clogged our waterways for thousands of years with corpses, human waste, chemicals and an outrageous variety of things we consider disposable (diapers, air conditioners, cars, soda and beer cans, just to name a few that i've seen through the years) and now we are harvesting reefs and killing off more sea life than our overfishing has been doing.
Quite frankly, the earth is an ecosystem that can exist without human beings. we are the scourge about it, not the cockroaches, parasites or bacteria that we fear will outsurvive us. humans as a species have proven themselves very innovative, but mostly in ways meant to kill, destroy, maim, change and overcome all that surrounds itself. Does that mean that I've lost hope in it's ability to wake up and smell the coffee, no. Energy never dies, it just changes forms. Hopefully, we humans can take our energy, and turn it into something positive and productive. Proper planning prevents poor performance.
I am always amazed at the ability of people to put the cart before the horse. They speak of spirituality or God as if their existence is established. In fact, there is no reason to presuppose the existence of either.
As for the question of the world's end there are two most probable outcomes: 1. the Big Crunch if gravity wins out over expansion or 2. infinite expansion.
If the former, yes the world will end. If the latter it will go on forever. But the issue of forever is a tricky thing. Forever implies the action of time. In a far-distant universe where entropy is maximized how can time be measured? It may have no meaning, and to invoke temporal terms like "forever" may be meaningless. As meaningless as to invoke "God."
Yes the world will end. The beautiful symetry that defines the universe seems to dictate that there was a beginning and there will be an end. That being said I really haven't given much thought to when it will happen. To me this is a waste of time. I prefer to spend my time pondering the wonders of the creation and creator rather than its demise. When it's over it's over knowing when it will come won't change it's inevitabilitiy.
Because I ascribe to no religious doctrine I feel less bound by the fear and anxiety brought on by the notion of the end of time. If anything I embrace it as a passage to another realm of interaction with and understanding of the wonders of creation, life and the grace of God.
Do I believe the world will come to an end ? It's kind of like asking "will the universe come to an end" We can not destroy what we did not create, like our selves, our consciousness comes from a more ethereal place, so does the earth. It's like saying you can kill a plant, but not the root. It will always be there.
We know very little about the origin and true nature of both ourselves and the universe, although some say we are really smart because we can send a man to the moon, or rid the planet of some diseases. But the fact remains that we are still living in a world of chaos, where war and killing continues everyday. Where hunger and poverty still exist. We have much to learn.
Garyd, I reject the concept of "interpretation" of scripture. From what I can tell, different interpretations amount to different claims of what God meant by the words. I agree with Harris about discarding the idea of scripture being the literal or inspired word of God and then letting the text's literal reading stand or fall on its own. But I disagree with Harris spending so much time savaging the literal reading, when Biblical literalists make up only a small percentage of the world's Christians.
"far from being Jefferson's work of a mad man Revelation is very like the work of a rather optimistic historian."
No, I think Jefferson was right the first time. Much of Revelation is about God slaughtering unbelievers because of their beliefs, and I find that idea to be abhorrent. When I read the text literally, I conclude that the end of pain and suffering is only for God's elect, and everyone else will endure suffering for eternity.
"The evidence is indeed that there will be wars and rumors of wars until the end of time, that plagues great and small will ravage humanity off and on for centuries. The historical record is quite clear on all of that."
And I agree. But that is not the view of literalist Christians. They see such troubles as warnings of the imminent vengeance of an angry God, instead of an inevitable part of human life.
Daniel, thank you I agree, Until we as a human race stop using religion as an excuse to not participate in our own destiny we are doomed. Gluttony, murder, and apathy all hide behind the veil of religion. The best minds would be better served to help Gods creations flourish and develop, not wait around to see what happens. If God does exist, I would feel much more comfortable explaining why I didn’t know Him/Her or praise Him/Her, rather than why my waiting for Him/Her aided in the demise of some of His/Her greatest creations.
Point of view is dependent upon where you stand, be it in the Americas, the Middle East, Europe Israel, China, and upon the many different religious viewpoints as well. Respect the diverse points of view, but remember the one common footing that everyone of us (including Jesus) has had our feet on, from which we all share our points of view, earth. We, as tenants, on and in the two greatest vessels ever known, (as humans), had better learn to take control of our own fate, otherwise religion becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. I’m sure there will always be multitudes that are just sitting waiting for the Lord to come and suck them up to heaven with His/Her dyson vacuum, like potato chips from between the cushions. It’s time to get in the game, otherwise, if there really is a God we’ll all have a lot of explaining to do, and you’d better hope the vacuum hose goes up!
sadly,people in march 2007 still sitting in their cynderala cold storage phiosophy salon,mellowing and entertaining,motion or not motion,static or dynamic,pysique or metaphique,biology or syntheitic ,reason or dogmatic,conscious or none conscious,morality or devility,virtue or none virtue,evolution or
downgradeation,begining or the end,now or then !.
death or none death,automatic or gear,computer command control or orgainc .
human beings issues answered long long time ago,just humble your heart and reason and read the last divine revelation(quran)mercey to your body and reason.
To consider the nature of personal consciousness seems an oversight. Awed by our intellectual capacity, our vision dims. Each person arrives on planet earth with a wide-open consciousness. Enters an already existent world; and so did the whole of humanity; and so did planet earth, itself.
There is an overall scheme. A physical world appears in a mind. Essentially life seems a REAL-IDEA interchange. We enter not only a material world, but a pre-existent world of thought as well.
As the physical world preceded human consciousness, to comply with this overall real-idea scheme, suggests a pre-human consciousness should also have existed,--to perceive it.
Lets entertain the idea pre-human consciousness did exist, is what brought the physical world into existence; which brought humanity into existence; and is what we refer to as God.
The physical world is governed by steadfast natural laws. Natural adaptation is one of these laws. A human mind is formed through body mechanics. The nervous system and physical senses deliver environmental reflections. A human body will adapt, or copy the environmental activity. Especially evident in the behavior of little children, and variable educational circles and cultures.
Now, this mind formed by the physical environment; would be very insignificant, in comparison to the nature of a consciousness capable of bringing a physical world into existence.
In fact, this mind formed by the physical machine is not consciousness at all. Consciousness is the holder of these perceptions! The natural arrangement is for perceptions to be delivered to the invisible person, the SELF;--to personal consciousness. Therefore, it would seem the natural arrangement is for SELF-control. Instead, we allow the environment,--the perceptions,--the body mechanics to form habits,--and so control,--or dominate activity.
Progress essentialy seems a transition from physical, to SELF-control; for the individual, and humanity. An escape from the mind formed by the physical senses, to the realization of truths. Physical principles as photosynthesis or gravity; behavioral principles as love or forgiveness; entered our world from, and are realized only deep within personal consciousness. The common thread in all our celebrities is that each separated from a mind acquired from an immediate environment to follow personal convictions.
This question of beginning and end could be the most obvious example of our failure to abandon our adaptive mind of physical appearances. The beginning and end mentality may prove an entirely human predicament. A mentality formed by 'a physical world gone wrong'. Planet earth and its inhabitants may have been brought into an already existent place with an entirely different mentality than that formed by defective physical mechanisms!
Evidence lies in the fact that this motion that brings things to an end is incompatible to our intrinsic conscious nature. Perhaps why we have psychological defense mechanisms. These could be adaptive mechanisms to protect an intact perfect SELF.
The physical world in its natural state, and the intrinsic arrangement for homeostasis is compatible. Evident in the appreciation of love and harmony expressed in art, literature, music, architecture, poetry and morality.
Where did oppressive activity, predatory motions that bring things to an end come from? Why would a physical world with an intrinsic harmonious arrangement for homeostasis, and appreciation of that arrangement by its top of an evolutionary chain product; hold motions as disease, predator-prey inter-relationship, earthquakes, floods or winds that cause sufferring and bring things to an end?
Is it not possible the arrangement of our anatomy and physiology could show original intent to copy and enjoy a compatible everlasting world? That we are not authentic, but may have been given access to an everlasting conscious existence through physical machinery? That a conscious dimension exists beyond 'the machine'? In which case, could another existence have caused disruption to the physical program?
I believe we search for a beginning because we had a 'beginning'. Were introductions to an already existent world. Given access to an existence that has no 'beginning' and no 'end'. That our mentality was not restricted within this range of physical thought. Human ideals as equality, truth, freedom, peace and love could be vestigial memories. Our separation from that world may not be of a linear; but of a conscious nature.
The physical environment is no longer in its original state. All has deviated from norm. Predation, or an overpowering force is what brings things to an end. Conscious adaptation, or copying that activity by humanity hastens direction toward an end. So, unless we escape from that mentality, we well could become extinct;--in fact have the intellectual ability to destroy, to end physical existence.
I do not think that will be the case. Because the body and environment do not define 'life'. Personal consciousness,--SELF is the life of the body;--of our world. From here emerged an energy, that with only a rudimentary release by the American Constitution rapidly moved us toward truth and compatibility.
The physical world is our world. We are not entirely conscious beings; but 'human' beings. To experience life, we need the machines. The physical body and environment are our 'life-support'machines. Thought moves the body. The most intrinsic need of personal consciousness is happiness;--which is dependent on satisfaction of human ideals.
These common ideals are not acquired frm the physical environment, and can't be communicated in the usual manner of physical instruction. I believe they exemplify the 'Will' of what we call God; that it is also the 'natural will' within personal consciousness. Through these natural conscious energies God can be here, there and everywhere. We can see that the gradual abandonment of these ideals by the medical and teaching professions, pharmaceutical and insurance corporations, religious establishments,and our government over the past four decades; enslaves and becomes incompatible to basic human nature. The public awakens. Demands restoration of direction toward common welfare.
Yes, I believe the human predicament is all due to separation of personal consciousness; from each other and God! That the capacity for humanity to correct this,--to come together in deepest thought is also a part of natural adaptation; a natural conscious affinity,--that will restore a perfect human world!
Because actually--where we can form, and control a physical mind,--personal consciousness is different,--forms a human 'spirit',--becomes an unlimited energy----can't be amputated!
Whatever the cause of motions that overpower and bring things to an end,--there is no question it is the evil we need to eradicate,--and the means exists deep within personal consciousness.
The infantilism on this thread really is incredible. The whole manichaean idea of good vs. bad lacks the simplest understanding of human nature. And to project a "God" in "heaven", who acts according to these lowly human superstitions, with the primitive human traits of fear and greed, revenge and reward is the pinnacle of foolishness.
The "judgment day" idea (stemming, btw, from a wrong translation) always has been and, alas, as proven here, still is nothing but a transparent means to wield power over simple minds. It has always worked.
And to imagine that these folks all vote - no wonder the world is in this desperate shape.
doesnot man see that we have created him from nutfah(mixed male and femal discharge).yet be hold!he stands forth as an open opponent.
and he puts forth for us a parable, and forget his own creation.he says :"who will give life to these bones when they have rotted away and became dust?"
say, he will give life to them who created them for the first time!and he is the all knower of every creation!
he ,produces for you fire out of the green tree ,when behold!you kindle therewith.
is not he ,who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them?yes, indeed!he is the all knowing supreme creator .
verily,his command,when he intends a thing ,he only that he says to it ,be! - and it is !
so glorified be he and exalted above all that they associate with him,and in his hands is the dominion of all things, and to him you shall be returned.
quran.yasin v77.
1-is the creator equal to who creat not?
2-wich is easyer initiating and originating or giving life back and returning?
3-life ,death are serious proof for the hour .
The *world* will not come to an end, but corrupt humans and their institutions on this planet will. The earth will then be restored to a paradise as it was originally designed to be. Those humans remaining will eventually become perfect in mind and body and live forever in harmony with the rest of creation under a perfect government of God himself. -- This is the only thing that keeps me wanting to get up each day in the the face of our country's (the U.S.) current wretched situation.
Mr. Harris, tonio, proved nothing except that he is a worse interpreter of scripture than the fundmentalists he condemns and that's going some.
There is no seven years of tribulation, and the end times countdown began the moment Christ asceneded into heaven and far from being Jefferson's work of a mad man Revelation is very like the work of a rather optimistic historian.
The evidence is indeed that there will be wars and rumors of wars until the end of time, that plagues great and small will ravage humanity off and on for centuries. The historical record is quite clear on all of that. The optimistic part is that God will bring an end to it a some point in the future.
Has it occured to any of you that you might ALL be wrong? What are the odds of any one of these posts being 100% accurate when our little clump of mud sits near the outer fringe of a galaxy comprised of +200XE9 stars in a universe of galaxies of at least that magnitude? You are a no more than a droplet of spittle in a sneeze and yet profess to be able to discern the entire context of a Pacific Ocean?
Science - leading the race for knowledge - doesn't yet know squat, and the religionists are at least 5000 years behind that (though - in some aspects - not many, but some - you might even be in the lead). The problem is, you believe that some immortal god would bother to create you, give you a brain capable of rudimentary reason, then tell you to completely abandon that ability so you can worship it in eternal life after it allows you to suffer death that it can't possibly imagine (being immortal) with a whole brain full of unanswered questions. Makes sense - if that god embodies absolute evil.
Truth be told, I imagine that that god - if it existed at all - would use the religionists' kind of belief to weed out the undeserving. After all, if this god is as omniscient as believed, what threat would such an inferior (though reasoning) creation pose to it?
Will the Earth end? Yes. Some of you have the final red giant toasting correct, but it could be sooner. There are objects floating out in the Oort cloud that could cause Earth's demise much sooner. That isn't really the problem though. What - or who - is life? What is conciousness? We can't even answer these most basic of questions. When anyone can come up with a reasonable answer to these questions, intelligence on Earth may finally be born.
'more secular violence in Iraq & Afghanistan'. This is heard almost daily in the media. The violence is not secular but religious!'. You will never have to worry about an atheist becoming a suicide bomber!
Here is my profiles that I just discovered it last 1997-2000 and contiune, I hope this will be helpful for you whom read my profiles that will be your answers. http://profiles.yahoo.com/ily2uily
Do you believe the world will come to an end? If so, where, when and what will it look like?
My belief is that the question should be what exactly is the human race doing to assure its continued existence and how much it is depending on pure accident or not really caring at all about an existence in the earthly, material sense and is mostly concerned with an afterlife in the religious sense.
The more the human race is not concerned about taking its destiny in its own hands and assuring its existence in the earthly, material sense the more we can say it depends on pure accident or consoles itself with an afterlife in the religious sense.
The less the human race takes its destiny in its own hands and assures its existence in the earthly, material sense the more we can say the end of the world is contracted into merely the probable end of the human race, for the world itself will continue apart from man until it meets its fate with the demise of the sun.
All hinges on whether man will take control of his own destiny or simply depend on accident--or prefer the religious belief in an afterlife. And my belief is that man really does not contemplate taking his destiny in his own hands, therefore if he continues to survive it will be purely by accident.
I foresee the end of man before the end of the world in the sense of the earth being burned up by the sun--and the end of man long before the demise of the solar system let alone the universe itself.
Man quite simply does not demonstrate what it takes to take his destiny in his own hands.
In fact we can easily imagine measures which would assure the human races survival much more than actions being taken today. Our imagination is such that we are clearly aware that we are not doing all we can do and that we fall back on just letting things run their course and hoping for the best.
If the human race really wanted to assure its existence, for example,--and I of course mean in the earthly, material sense and not in some sort of metaphysical sense--we all would have an increased spirit of self-sacrifice in the direction of locating the most gifted among us and pushing them to the forefront--and these gifted people themselves with an increased spirit of abnegation.
What I mean exactly is something of recognizing our copyright and patent laws as nothing more than a system of locating the gifted, and as we get better at it dispense with copyright and patent and simply push the gifted to the fore to such a degree that the absence of copyright and patent cannot possibly lead to plagiarism, etc.--for there will quite simply be too many gifted and committed persons to put up with nonsense and they all will in fact be bent on creating and dying, creating and dying and pushing humanity higher and higher toward superhumanity which will make all of us increasingly not worth remembering.
But of course the world is far from that today. In fact what I have just described looks like merely a type of totalitarianism to people today.--Which is why I say we really just depend on accident and in fact hope in an afterlife in the metaphysical sense.
The question is not whether a person believes the world will come to an end but whether we at all have any faith now the human race will live to leave the world (earth) by its own invention. All the details about the human races failure are irrelevant (what the end of man will look like and when it will occur...However we do know it will occur on earth...).
Let me stress once more that we now clearly have the imagination to consider what the human race should do to increase its chances for survival but that such measures look like a type of totalitarianism to most people. We are talking about it being inculcated in school that we all are nothing more than links in a chain toward superhumanity, that self-sacrifice must increase, that we must seek out and defer to the gifted, that in fact intelligence must increase without however the seen and unseen dangers of such.
Our politics today is remote from such contemplations. And religion of course has no integrity in the matter because it defeats the whole purpose of such right from the start by positing the possibility of an afterlife apart from man's own hands, an afterlife given by God.
My belief is the world (earth) will outlast man unless man is just lucky. I believe man will bring about his own demise--or be saved from such by God or something. At least we hope we will be saved by God from such before we realize it is we ourselves that have botched everything. Certainly we can see today we are ruining much and that if there is a God he is saving us from only our own stupidity.
But what kind of God is the God of the stupid unless the hope of the stupid in something better than themselves and what can save them? In this case the end of the world will be when the human race really feels stupid and gives up, simply turns to God, and that day does not seem far off what with weapons of mass destruction, the destruction of the environment, etc.
The end of the world. What a question. The question should be whether the human race will see the end of the century and the beginning of another. If so, perhaps hope in a new world.
It really boggles the mind that people really
believe this idiocy. There is more truth in
Harry Potter books then the bible, Harry Potter
at least wasn't censored, written, rewitten,and
formulated to enslave women.
Here you have a blogger believing in Noah's
flood. If this is a true story then it only
proves that the god you believe in is insane.
To destroy it's own creations and proclaim
"Thou shalt not kill" is hypocrisy at it's
worst.
This god of yours is a terrorist at best, in fact
if those of you believe in the devil and believes
that the devil is the height of deviousness then
who is to say that the devil isn't the god
that is protrayed in the bible in order to
keep you from seeking true knowledge?
I was just wondering whether anyone expressing a string of "spiritual" notions, such as "Just as it was in the day of Noah, so shall it be when the Son of Man returns . . . .," can feel a specific part or side of the brain becoming very active. Wouldn't it be interesting to analyze the brain waves of someone experiencing a feeling of spirituality?
It really boggles the mind that people really
believe this idiocy. There is more truth in
Harry Potter books then the bible, Harry Potter
at least wasn't censored, written, rewitten,and
formulated to enslave women.
Here you have a blogger believing in Noah's
flood. If this is a true story then it only
proves that the god you believe in is insane.
To destroy it's own creations and proclaim
"Thou shalt not kill" is hypocrisy at it's
worst.
This god of yours is a terrorist at best, in fact
if those of you believe in the devil and believes
that the devil is the height of deviousness then
who is to say that the devil isn't the god
that is protrayed in the bible in order to
keep you from seeking true knowledge?
Yes. The world as we know it WILL end. When that will be, no one knows. There will always be skeptics who say differently. There were also those who said it wouldn't rain when Noah said it would. Most people have the "Missouri" mentality - I won't believe it unless I see it for myself. When it rained for the very first time in Noah's day, no one had ever seen rain before. Not believing doesn't make a thing untrue, and it certainly didn't make the rain stop. Just as it was in the day of Noah, so shall it be when the Son of Man returns. If we knew when that time was, we'd do what we always do - wait until the last minute and hope we make it in. In this instance, it's about who and what you know. Someday, when you least expect it, it will all be over. REALLY! But on the other hand, seeing IS believing. If you don't believe me, just wait and see!
"So how did all those prophecies come to life then if he knew nothing about them being uneducated and all? Because He must have been God? Instead of Christians having to explain our beliefs, how about non-Christians explaining their non-belief in Christ. Prove to me that Jesus wasn’t God! You cant because you use human reasoning, not proof."
What prophecies are you talking about? I haven't seen any come to life, have you?
I am not asking you to explain your beliefs, because that would be an exercise in futility. Most people I know who fervently belief in religion have been indoctrinated from early childhood and they need to desperately cling to a faith. Actually, I think that has to do with fear of the unkown and some feeling of inferiority. Please, do not think that I mean this derogatory. I am just stating my feelings.
I thought I have explained why I can not be a Christian. I do not believe the Bible to be divinely inspired. It is a book compiled from many different writings and authors, some of whom weren’t even alive when Jesus was preaching. Why is there not one book in the bible that was written by a member of his immediate family? Why didn’t he write it himself? I view the good book as a he said/she said novel. If I want to know the truth, I go to the source. I don’t ask 20 other people what they think the truth is. Does that make sense?
As far as proving Jesus wasn’t God, of course I can’t proof it. Just as you can’t proof that he was. If anything, he was/is the son, but he is not God. By the way, I understand Satan is a son too. And all the other angels, etc. Aren’t they son and daughters as well?
Oh, well! All I can say is, I have my own faith and it does not include any organized religion. I think that if we strive to be the very best we can be, to be kind and understanding, to give when there is a need, to not harm anyone in our lifetime, then we have fulfilled the our destiny of earth. What comes after, if anything, is a mystery.
As per Father Edward Schillebeeckx, the famous contemporary Christian theologian, God does not know the Future. From his book, Church: The Human Story of God, "Therefore the historical future is not known even to God; otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings. For God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."
And if God does not know the future, Mohammed, Jesus, Joseph Smith and Isaiah surely did not.
In two sentences of profound common sense, Schillibeeckx has reduced the OT, NT, the Book of Mormon and the Koran to good but wishful thinking of many ancient scribes.
This falls correctly in line with two of God's greatest dependent gifts, i.e. Free Will and Future.
Pause and think about it!!!
Now consider:
“I believe the Bible is inspired.” “Why?” “Because it says so.”
Would anyone let that logic pass if it came from the followers of any other book or person? “I believe x is inspired because x says so.” Fill in the blanks:
x=Pat Robertson
x=the ayatolloah Sistani
x=David Koresh
x=the Koran”
Plus this:
There is no archeological evidence that the Moses of the OT ever existed. The scribes who wrote the OT, embellished many old Jewish tales/legends/myths to fit their concept of Monad and to keep the general tribal communities in line with oral tradition/guilt. The trails/trials of Noah, Abraham, Job and Moses were concepts for tribal nomads/peasants/shepherds/ordinary folk living in the age of illiteracy, short life spans, hardships, diseases, and "dirt poor" living conditions. Mankind has advanced and these concepts although wise for the ages, are not historical.
The evolutionary process continues with contributions from the historical Buddha, John the Baptist, Jesus, Paul, the NT scribes, Constantine, Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Schillebeeckx, the Jesus Seminar, Crossan, Mother Theresa, and the Hubble Telescope.
According to my Scripture
Which my Faith Tells me is Infallibly True
The world will end
when a truck full of Hostess Twinkies
drives off a bridge and
crashes into a Liquid Gas Tanker,
causing an explosion that detonates
a nearby electrical plant
and a Vision of the Baby Jesus
will fill the skies the whole world over
and all men will lie down in terror
and begin speaking Hungarian flawlessly.
What a bunch of crap. Sure there is a chance
that humanity will suffer in the not too distant
future, but it won't be because Christ is returning.
Global warming, eruption of Yellowstone National
park, or any of the many global threats around
the world.
If this world ends because of war it will come
at the behest of organized religion which is
the real Weapon of Mass destruction.
Nothing separates humanity then having all these
different religious cults believing that their
god is the only god.
Christ will return, and he will return by the
year of 2075, but his return will not be to
send evil doers to hades and lift believers up to
heaven, his return will be to correct the mistake made by Saul that created an organized
Christian religion.
Christ was Jewish, he never converted to a religion that didn't exist, Christianity didn't
come about until 600 years after Christ's death.
Proverb: If you fear your own godliness you
will create a god that you fear.
Though I have not read every entry in this blog, I can say that most that I have read contain little or no truth or reason. The Bible is explicit and clear... Jesus will return, bodily, to this earth. Prior to His return, there will be great troubles upon the earth - such as was never seen in times past. These troubles will come for a two-fold purpose. 1) To pressure people to seek the true and Living God - and perchance they will cry out for salvation. 2) For a judgement upon those that have rejected Jesus Christ.... When Jesus comes, the world as we know it will be gone. The King of Kings will rule and we will have true peace on this earth.
I believe this world will come to an end, and sometimes it seems close by, but Jesus said, "No one knows the day or the hour, only my Father in heaven." It really does not matter. We must be prepared. My world or your world could end at any minute. We do not know when the Lord will take us from this life. Until that moment, we need to live life to the fullest by doing His will!
I believe this world will come to an end, and sometimes it seems close by, but Jesus said, "No one knows the day or the hour, only my Father in heaven." It really does not matter. We must be prepared. My world or your world could end at any minute. We do not know when the Lord will take us from this life. Until that moment, we need to live life to the fullest by doing His will!
How will this world end? It will end by a star falling from sky. It will be at night. Most of living things will disappear but not entirely. Peace will come to Earth....and starts new again as before, no computers..but loving people who care for one another and they will live without modern technology. This is the cycle of the entire universe. Never ending.
The Our Father was given to us by Jesus directly from the Father in response to the question "how should we pray?" "World without end. Amen." When this prayer is said- we are agreeing to the fact the world will not end. There will be an end of the age....as there has been before. we cannot go on offending God by our selfishness, leaving Him out of creation, and ignoring the oppressed! After a chastisement-there will be an era of peace... without tv, computers and all electrical interferances. We forget why we were created..."to know,love and serve God."
The Our Father was given to us by Jesus directly from the Father in response to the question "how should we pray?" "World without end. Amen." When this prayer is said- we are agreeing to the fact the world will not end. There will be an end of the age....as there has been before. we cannot go on offending God by our selfishness, leaving Him out of creation, and ignoring the oppressed! After a chastisement-there will be an era of peace... without tv, computers and all electrical interferances. We forget why we were created..."to know,love and serve God."
LOL,when the world will end isnt known, nor can it be predicted, what is known is that in about 4 billion years the moon will have pulled far enough away from the earth to cause major climactic and geographical upheavals thus possibly ending some or even all life. but the planet will remain largely intact. those concerned with the extinction of the human race shouldnt be, as there have been many dynamic and quite successful creatures that have dominated this planet at one time or another and eventually died off.no big deal something will replace us as best it can.
Life on earth will end before the earth itself does. In the end it'll just be cockroaches eating the remains of our remains. Then after a few billion years it'll all just blink out of existence. I won't be around to see it so I don't worry about it. I'm much more concerned about global warming killing off humanity. That will be ugly and I might be around to see it.
In my opinion and based on my understanding of my faith, the world is not going to end but rather be changed. Some may ask in what way?
My answer is that the world will be changed by the elimination of all that is evil. Call it a restoration to it's original state of being "Good, Very Good."
Billy
To call Jesus "uneducated" would be a statement of complete ignorance. Even if Jesus was not God, He must have studied so hard to memorize all of the prophecies concerning His coming. But then again your right Gaby! He probably did not have too much of an education at all being just a simple carpenter. So how did all those prophecies come to life then if he knew nothing about them being uneducated and all? Because He must have been God? Instead of Christians having to expain our beliefs, how about non-Christians explaining their non-belief in Christ. Prove to me that Jesus wasnt God! You cant because you use human reasoning, not proof.
As per Father Edward Schillebeeckx, the famous contemporary Christian theologian, God does not know the Future. From his book, Church: The Human Story of God, "Therefore the historical future is not known even to God; otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings. For God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."
And if God does not know the future, Mohammed, Jesus, Joseph Smith and Isaiah surely did not.
In two sentences of profound common sense, Schillibeeckx has reduced the OT, NT, the Book of Mormon and the Koran to good but wishful thinking of many ancient scribes.
This falls correctly in line with two of God's greatest dependent gifts, i.e. Free Will and Future.
David, you are more than welcome to your faith. You may have found YOUR truth in Jesus and so be it. To me, Jesus was an uneducated carpenter who couldn't even write his own Bible. Had he really been God, he should have whipped that thing out in the blink of an eye. At least then I wouldn't have to wonder who wrote what, when, and under which influence. As it is, he didn't do that. Nor did God ever write anything down in any other religion. Instead he supposedly chose to use "prophets".
You may have a hard time believing it, but I do believe in God. Just not the God that is described in any so-called holy book.
David, you say, "You have to study the Bible to truly understand its meaning."
I agree. it's not an easy read - nor should it be, written so long ago in completely different styles than what we're used to today, and translated and copied so many times.
Unfortunately, many people today read the bible and decide it says whatever they want it to say - and then decide everyone should agree with that interpretation.
Truly pitiful. You've got a brain - and an education -- use them - get your nose out of that one, old book
Gaby what you fail to realize is that Jesus IS God and there is proof. You do not understand that Jesus in the flesh was God on earth but becuase he was in the flesh (as human) he had to partake in the mortality of humanity, leaving Him as He was on earth to be the Son of God. But in heaven as the Father. Of course you would think that its contradicting, Jesus would pray to His Father in heaven, which seems like a contradiction. But I urge you to study the matter more and realize that some things cannot be taken at face value. You have to study the Bible to truly understand its meaning. Trust me, I went through the same thing you thought and found the Truth in Jesus. And since the Truth is real, the end time prophecies are too. So many prophecies have come to pass. Just research it and you can find no faults. Things written a 1000 years before they happened (scientifically proven) and occured in minute detail. And the things to come will happen as well. So, dont be ignorant in things you say which have to proof but just opinion. Jesus urges us all to prove him right and according to James "challenge everything." So do that with an unbiased conscious and you will find all that is written in the Bible to be the true Word of God.
Controlling a child with the indoctrination of the fear of hell, that the child will Burn if she doesn't obey God (and her parents), that she is a creature full of sin,
IS by any reasonable definition from professional psychological bodies
psychological *abuse* of a child.
Jesus (or whomever) coming at the last day to "pour out his wrath on the sinners", as one other poster here so sweetly puts it,
is a profoundly destructive myth in its effect on the psyche's of the children who are subjected to it.
Nothing is eternal. all is meant to be broken. The holy books call this day a very terrible day ( this thousands of years ago; imagine that); with the exception of rapture ready folks; all others call it the end; judgement day.
For some Christians like the followers of John Haggee, Christianity has gone beyond being Doomsday cult into becoming an actual suicide cult. These Jim Jones characters are peddling a WW3 scenario that is not from the Bible, but more like the race war Helter Skelter preached by Charles Manson. Besides, their contrived patchwork narrative of the end of the world is lifted from Zoroastrianism, which the Jews would have gotten in bits and pieces while in Babylon. Our modern Millenialists are peddling the Babylonian narrative, which makes them PAGAN not Christian.
Besides, according to Hal Lindsey, the world ended in 1988. Didn't you get the memo?
We are living in the End Days now according to the messages given to the late Veronica Leuken by Jesus and the Blessed Mother and many of the Saints at Our Lady of the Roses Shrine in Bayside New York where over 300 messages of worldwide importance were given for all mankind from 1970-1995 during rosary vigils which still go on to this very day. To ready the messages and find out the miraculous happenings at the Bayside Apparition Site visit www.smwa.org or e-mail me about my personal experiences over the years going to the rosary prayer vigils.
"“As for the exact day or hour, no one knows it, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father only” (Matthew 24:36)."
Very interesting! Where does that leave the trinity? On numerous other topics in these blogs, people state that Jesus is Lord, that he is God in the flesh, that they are one and the same.
So, as usual, the Bible contradicts itself.
Either Jesus is God in the flesh, then he knows when and how the end of the world will come, or he is not, then there is not trinity.
Just confirms my belief that all religions are a bunch of hooey, made by men for men to keep the populace in line. Divine inspiration? My foot!
Too much grape juice, shrooms, or whatever, and everyone can have a divine inspiration.
For documentation you may reference The Ottoman Centuries by Kinross. There are other documents, including the histories of the subjects of the Ottomans.
For someone who likes instructive posts about Islam (I grew up in an Islamic country by the way), you are not informative about past and present practices.
I was looking for an explanation, and would still appreciate one, however.
Think about this logic (or lack thereof).
“I believe the Bible is inspired.” “Why?” “Because it says so.”
Would anyone let that logic pass if it came from the followers of any other book or person? “I believe x is inspired because x says so.” Fill in the blanks:
x=Pat Robertson
x=the ayatolloah Sistani
x=David Koresh
x=the Koran”
AMviennaVA says: "A trait of Ottoman rule was to hold their Christian subjects in the cities hostage. Every 15 years or so, on Fridays, the gates would be locked, and after Friday prayers, the faithful would engage in an orgy of massacres lasting from 1 - 4 days."
I never heard of that one. It's possible though, I suppose. Sounds a lot like the anti-Jewish pogroms European Christians used to carry out regularly, right up into the twentieth century.
I'm a Catholic and I don't concern myself with the end of the world jargon. Just live your life and enjoy family, friends and give back to society when you can.
Enjoy life my friends... For what other purpose do we have then to serve each other in charity, hope, love and truthfulness.
The bible says that the end of the world will come when the earthy governments bring an end to false religion . All religion will be destroyed. And the one that’s is left Jehovah’s Witness , the governments will try to destroy them but with no avail. Then That’s when Jehovah God steps in and wipes the unrepentant off the face of the
Josh, the difference between the end of the Sun's life and the various religions' teachings about Armageddon is that the former is not described as a punishment from a vengeful supreme being.
The blog has taken an interesting turn. There is a clarification I would like from Muslims:
A trait of Ottoman rule was to hold their Christian subjects in the cities hostage. Every 15 years or so, on Fridays, the gates would be locked, and after Friday prayers, the faithful would engage in an orgy of massacres lasting from 1 - 4 days. (Those must have been very persuasive sermons delivered by the muezins). It served to keep the 'slaves' in the countryside obedient, since they tended to have family in the cities.
Granted the Ottomans empire is gone, but I have noticed similar events in Iraq, especially in the early days of the insurrection: following Friday payers, the faithful would engage in some atrocity against those of the other sect (Shia or Sunni).
My question is WHY still?
(I realize that the past year or so, by which time Iraqi society has become essentially segregated by sect, the practice has abated).
I believe we are not living at the end of the world but at the end of a great cycle of time. Most religions have a figure expected at the "end times". Christians have the 'second coming'. Jews have the Messiah. Many Muslims have the Mahdi. Hindus have the Kalki Avatar and Buddhists Matreya. Could all these religions be saying the same thing albeit with a different name? Are we just entering a new cycle of time?
Yes, the world will end at some point, when the Sun goes supernova a few million years from now. Will humans as we know them still be around? Or will we have managed to kill ourselves off with nuclear war, global warming, fighting over religious differences, etc.? Myself, I prefer to think that we'll get over our differences and colonize other planets before Mother Earth gets absorbed into a supernova
As for the supposed "end of the world" in the Book of Revelations, I've heard that it was a prophecy about the Roman conquest of Jerusalem and the destruction of Solomon's temple in 72 AD. Or the conquest of Rome by the barbarian tribes. Personally, I think that someone ate some funny mushroooms and wrote down their bad trip.
Why do so few comment on the obvious psychological manipulation of all religions in order to enforce compliance and keep
that tithing coming? (remember "follow the money""?
Three of hundreds of examples:
=Catholics have perfected the art of setting standards that are so impossible that members MUST confess their sins by coming to church regularly, and paying their penance. Most other churches have their version of this.
-The twisted and damaging inculcation in children of the fear of Hellfire and Eternal damnation: a great abomination in my opinion.
=The Mormons' explicit threat that if you DON"T follow the prophet and his laws
you will lose contact with your family in eternity. (Paradise, after the Latter Days)
How do we judge the "morality" of these practices?
St. Paul's description/prediction of the imminent second coming, i.e. 1 Thessalonians 4: 15-17, was a great way to get Gentiles to convert and give money to the cause but to say the least he was not much of a prophet thankgoodness. Televangelists still use the description/prediction though to get "guilt-trip" donations.
Its too bad that people cant realize that all the prophecies in the Bible have came true and that the end time prophecies are already being fullfilled. No one knows when its gonna happen but it will. Dont worry atheists, Gods White Throne Judgement will give you another chance to believe in Him.
Most of you christians are missing one the main points. We only have to respect your "right" to believe in the biblical apocolypse. We DO NOT have to respect the belief itself.
The beliefs of biblical literalists do not deserve any respect, only ridicule.
"It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825
I believe this concept exemplifies our conscious immaturity. Of thought dominated by physical images and environmental appearance. Of a persistent pre-occupation with oppressive deleterious physical motions,--of environmental control.
Many worlds have ended. Social worlds. As truths enter, and nations are conquered; society adjusts--and worlds change. Still, all retain an oppressive hierarchy system; where status is determined by individual material gain.
Not the physical world; but this conscious world is what I believe will come to an end. The reality,--the world where power control determines direction; and enhances suffering.
Because deep within personal thought exists a common place to which there is equal access. To reach it requires not end of the physical world,--but an escape from oppressive mentality. Nature has endowed us with a primary need for happiness; and made satisfaction dependent on a just social environment.
Oppressive social control,---the governments created by mankind,--are incompatible to our most basic needs for equality, truth, freedom, love, peace and recognition of personal worth. This is the world to which Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed and all the Hindu gods guided us. Not those with material accomplishments, but these people have been the most celebrated in our course.
So, to me this would seem to exemplify our inherent nature. That it is the world of power control, of oppressive thought that will end; and this 'human spirit', which seems an unlimited strength and energy will prevail.
In essence when this is completed,--it will be the second coming of Christ,--because it is not the physical features of Jesus we rever, but the thought,--the manner He treated other people; a behavioral potential to which social reward is not attached, and hence remains buried deep in personal thought!
Of course the world will end one bright and sunny day. And even "when" and "how" can be debated up till the day the world does actually ends. Maybe we will all have time to point our fingers at each other and exclaim" "See I told you so!"
I just think that this old world will end before her time. Its a shame that we have all these nukes just lying around though. Because even if Mother Earth got lucky and the Human race was killed out by some strange and incurable disease, all those nukes and reactors would poison the atmospehere, and the environment. And thats not counting all the underground bunkers filled with canisters of poisonous gases. All the cans of nuclear waste, etc... They will all eventually rust and spill out too. Yep! We as the Human Race will have left our lasting legacy for sure! Even in death we will make sure that our toys keep on killing everything else. Or heck, maybe one of our leaders will just wake up in a bad mood and hit all the red buttons! And Ka-Boom! Or just some misunderstood and lonely terrorist will start the chain of events to end everything. The possibilities are endless. But its our Planet, and all the other living creatures that will suffer regardless of how the end comes. We, the human race will finally get what we deserve for our arrogance, and selfish behaviors. So be don't be sad! Be Happy!
Now I can honestly say that the questions are getting stupider and stupider! There is not doubt the world will come to an end, everthing dies at one time or another. When? Anyone's guess is as good as mine! How? Definitely not by the apocalyiptic 4 horsemen! What will it look like? Dead! What else would it look like?
I'll pop in now and then just to see what the religiously infected are coming up with.
Do you believe the world will come to an end? If so, where, when and what will it look like?
I am interested in limited ends. I have my own end as terminus to think on (Lord, let me know my end as the Psalmist asks). I have my own end - as fulfillment - to think of. The sudden and drastic 'end' as terminus of 'everything' is a purposeless discussion - beyond any realistic limitations I care about. The 'end' as purpose or as completion is what the Bible talks about - yes even in that book of Revelation. Apocalypse simply means what is unveiled. And what is unveiled is the nakedness of God in the flesh of Jesus, exposing how power structures - both political and religious - deal with the even limited ends that I might be competent to be interested in. My terminus (unknown) and my completion (known in part) are in this naked man in his death. I have known the intimation of regeneration as a result of my walk in his way. The invitation to 'put to death' self 'in his death' is an invitation followed by anyone pursuing non-violent resistance to power (whether that of others or one's own) to the end that we would not continue to 'kill the one we love'.
The end will have come when we like wisdom at the foundation of the world are at play. Auden's poem in Britten's Hymn to St Cecelia comes to mind:
I cannot grow,
I have no shadow
To run away from,
I only play.
I cannot err,
There is no creature
Whom I belong to,
Whom I could wrong.
I am defeat
When it knows it
Can now do nothing
By suffering.
All you lived through,
Dancing because you
No longer need it
For any deed.;
Only God knows where, when, and what it will look like. We do know that the world as we know it now will end, but only God knows the time frame.
I know that is true because he told us so in his word. I pray everyday for Jesus return. All he ask of us is to have faith and watch for the signs of the end of days. If some of you think my belief makes me crazy then I am proud to be.
"A rapid increase in “glacial earthquakes” – caused by sudden large movements of glaciers – over the past few years indicates that warmer temperatures will destroy the Greenland ice sheet faster than expected, a new study warns."
If Ama is correct
1/2 of the US Population is Mentally ill.
I do agree that this belief is psychotic. Is it more psychotic than believing in a God who answers your prayers?
That is what stumps me. We generally consider people who believe in God to be mainstream, and the 1/2 of the US population who believe Jesus will return in the next fifty years we consider Wackos.
If Ama is correct
1/2 of the US Population is Mentally ill.
I do agree that this belief is psychotic. Is it more psychotic than believing in a God who answers your prayers?
That is what stumps me. We generally consider people who believe in God to be mainstream, and the 1/2 of the US population who believe Jesus will return in the next fifty years we consider Wackos.
Do I believe that Ieshua will return and take his faithful followers to heaven with him and all the rest go to hell? Not by a long shot.
Do I believe that it is possible for the planet to reach a state of uninhabitability for any species except the cockroach? You bet your sweet bippy, and we're doing it to ourselves.
We continue to poison our air, foul our water, and contaminate our soil. Our insistence on the convenience of disposable items, and our lazy refusal to reuse and recycle whenever possible has our landfills overflowing, and garbage barges chugging up an down rivers with no place to unload their cargo.
We continue to turn a blind eye to the fact that the planet does not belong to us, we belong to her. And we are killing her.
1. The Sun will burn out in 3-4 billion years so we have a time frame.
2. Asteroids continue to whiz by us daily.
3. One large hit and it is all over in a blast of permanent winter.
4. There are enough nuclear weapons to do the same job.
5. Most contemporary NT exegetes do not believe in the Second Coming so apparently there is no concern about JC coming back on an asteroid or cloud of raptor.
Bottom line: the world will end sometime between now and 3-4 billion CE.
Instead of answering the question, Sam Harris refuted its premise in "Letter to a Christian Nation." The relevant paragraph is quoted at the link below. I hope he contributes an article for this On Faith topic.
Video
Twitter
RSS Feed
Few Bible expressions have become as much a part of everyday speech as “Armageddon” has. The term has been widely used to describe the gloomy prospects facing humans. The entertainment industry has fed people’s imagination with horrific scenes of a coming “Armageddon.” The word is shrouded in mystery and misconceptions. While ideas as to its meaning abound, most of them are not in line with what the Bible—the source of the expression—teaches about Armageddon.
Since the Bible links Armageddon with “the end of the world,” it is vital to have a clear understanding of what the word really signifies. (Matthew 24:3, King James Version)
An examination of the Bible shows that instead of bringing a cataclysmic end, Armageddon will introduce a happy beginning for people who desire to live and thrive in a righteous new world.
The word “Armageddon” has its origin in the Hebrew expression “Har–Magedon,” or “Mountain of Megiddo.” It is found at Revelation 16:16, which states: “They gathered them together to the place that is called in Hebrew Har–Magedon.” The Bible explains who are assembled to Armageddon, and why. Revelation 16:14: “The kings of the entire inhabited earth” are gathered together “to the war of the great day of God the Almighty.”
The Bible explains where these “kings” fight. The reference to the “Mountain of Megiddo” does not mean that Armageddon will be fought at a certain mountain in the Middle East. For one thing, no such mountain really exists—at the site of ancient Megiddo, there is only a mound rising about 70 feet [20 m] above the adjacent valley plain. In addition, the area around Megiddo could not begin to hold all “the kings of the earth and their armies.” (Revelation 19:19) However, Megiddo was the site of some of the fiercest and most decisive battles in Middle Eastern history. Thus, the name Armageddon stands as a symbol of a decisive conflict, with only one clear victor.
In addition, the Bible explains over what issue these kings battle, and with whom. Armageddon cannot be just a conflict among earthly nations, since Revelation 16:14 states that “the kings of the entire inhabited earth” form a united front at “the war of the great day of God the Almighty.” In his inspired prophecy, Jeremiah stated that “those slain by Jehovah” will be scattered “from one end of the earth clear to the other end of the earth.” (Jeremiah 25:33) Thus, Armageddon is not a human war confined to a particular location in the Middle East. It is Jehovah’s war, and it is global.
At Revelation 16:16, Armageddon is called a “place.” In the Bible, “place” may signify a condition or a situation—in this case, that the entire world will be united in its opposition to Jehovah. (Revelation 12:6, 14) At Armageddon all earthly nations ally themselves against “the armies that were in heaven” under the military command of the “King of kings and Lord of lords,” Jesus Christ.—Revelation 19:14, 16.
Armageddon will not be a holocaust involving weapons of mass destruction or a collision with a celestial body. A loving God would not allow such a horrific end to humankind and their home, the earth. He expressly states that he did not create the earth “simply for nothing” but “formed it even to be inhabited.” (Isaiah 45:18; Psalm 96:10) At Armageddon, Jehovah will not ruin our globe in a cataclysmic conflagration. Rather, he will “bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”—Revelation 11:18.
When will Armageddon come? Examining the book of Revelation in the light of other parts of the Bible determines the timing of this crucial battle. Revelation 16:15 links Armageddon with Jesus’ coming as a thief. That word picture is also used by Jesus in describing his coming to execute judgment on this system of things.—Matthew 24:43, 44; 1 Thessalonians 5:2.
As shown by the fulfillment of Bible prophecies, since 1914 we have been living in the last days of this system of things. Marking the final part of the last days will be the period that Jesus called the “great tribulation.” The Bible does not say how long that period will be, but the calamities associated with it will be worse than anything the world has ever seen. That great tribulation will culminate at Armageddon.—Matthew 24:21, 29.
Since Armageddon is “the war of the great day of God the Almighty,” there is nothing that humans can do to postpone it. Jehovah has set an “appointed time” for that war to start. “It will not be late.”—Habakkuk 2:3.
Why would God wage a global war? Armageddon is closely related to one of his cardinal qualities, justice. The Bible declares: “Jehovah is a lover of justice.” (Psalm 37:28) He has seen all the acts of injustice perpetrated during man’s history. This naturally provokes his righteous displeasure. Thus, he has appointed his Son to wage a just war in order to do away with this entire wicked system.
Only Jehovah is capable of waging a truly just and truly selective war during which righthearted individuals, wherever they may be on earth, will be preserved. (Matthew 24:40, 41; Revelation 7:9, 10, 13, 14) And only he has the right to impose his sovereignty over all the earth, for it is his creation.—Revelation 4:11.
The Bible doesn’t specify what forces Jehovah will use against his enemies. What we do know is that he has at his disposal the means to devastate the wicked nations completely. (Job 38:22, 23; Zephaniah 1:15-18) However, God’s earthly worshippers will not participate in the battle. The vision in Revelation chapter 19 indicates that only heavenly armies will share with Jesus Christ in the warfare. None of Jehovah’s Christian servants on earth will take part.—2 Chronicles 20:15, 17.
What about survivors? No one needs to perish at Armageddon. The apostle Peter observed: “Jehovah . . . does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9) And the apostle Paul stated that God’s “will is that all sorts of men should be saved and come to an accurate knowledge of truth.”—1 Timothy 2:4.
To that end, Jehovah has wisely made sure that the “good news of the kingdom” is proclaimed far and wide, in hundreds of languages. People everywhere are being given the opportunity for survival and salvation. (Matthew 24:14; Psalm 37:34; Philippians 2:12) Those who respond favorably to the good news can survive Armageddon and live forever in perfection on a paradise earth. (Ezekiel 18:23, 32; Zephaniah 2:3; Romans 10:13)
Many wonder, however, why a God who is the very embodiment of love would inflict death and destruction on much of humankind. It is because of Jehovah’s deep affection for humans that the battle of Armageddon has to be fought. God’s purpose is to make the earth a paradise and to elevate mankind to perfection and peace, with “no one making them tremble.” (Micah 4:3, 4; Revelation 21:4) God must eliminate those who threaten the peace and security of their fellow humans—the incorrigibly wicked—for the sake of the righteous ones.—2 Thessalonians 1:8, 9; Revelation 21:8.
Much of the strife and bloodshed today is caused by imperfect human rulership and the selfish striving for nationalistic interests. (Ecclesiastes 8:9) Seeking to expand their influence, human governments totally disregard God’s established Kingdom. There is no indication that they will relinquish their sovereignty to God and Christ. (Psalm 2:1-9) Such governments must therefore be removed to pave the way for the righteous rule of Jehovah’s Kingdom under Christ. (Daniel 2:44) Armageddon must be fought in order to resolve once and for all the issue of who has the right to rule this planet and humankind.
Jehovah’s active intervention at Armageddon will be with mankind’s best interests at heart. In the face of worsening world conditions, only God’s perfect rulership will completely satisfy mankind’s needs. Only by means of his Kingdom will true peace and prosperity prevail. If God forever refrained from taking action, hatred, violence, and wars would continue to plague mankind as they have throughout the centuries of human rulership. The battle of Armageddon is actually one of the best things that could happen to us.—Luke 18:7, 8; 2 Peter 3:13.
Armageddon will accomplish something that no other war has ever accomplished—the end of all wars. However, the end of war has eluded all human efforts. Such repeated failure of human attempts to end war merely emphasizes the truth of Jeremiah’s words: “I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.” (Jeremiah 10:23) Regarding what Jehovah will accomplish the Bible promises: “He is making wars to cease to the extremity of the earth. The bow he breaks apart and does cut the spear in pieces; the wagons he burns in the fire.”—Psalm 46:8, 9.
As the nations use their deadly weapons on one another and threaten to destroy the environment, the Maker of the earth will take action—at the Biblical Armageddon. (Revelation 11:18) This war, therefore, will accomplish what God-fearing men throughout the ages could only hope for. It will vindicate the rightful rulership of earth’s Owner, Jehovah God, over all his creation.
Thus, Armageddon is not to be feared by people who love righteousness. Rather, it provides a basis for hope. The war of Armageddon will cleanse the earth of all corruption and wickedness and open the way for a righteous new system of things under the rule of God’s Messianic Kingdom. (Isaiah 11:4, 5) Instead of being a frightening cataclysmic end, Armageddon will signal a happy beginning for righteous individuals, who will live forever on a paradise earth.—Psalm 37:29.
July 16, 2008 7:00 PM | Report Offensive Comment
rbzkunliv qnxhrde zirf eamtrjknd gvtixc xflrkhqaz udfmojlwk
June 19, 2008 9:26 AM | Report Offensive Comment
rbzkunliv qnxhrde zirf eamtrjknd gvtixc xflrkhqaz udfmojlwk
June 19, 2008 9:26 AM | Report Offensive Comment
rbzkunliv qnxhrde zirf eamtrjknd gvtixc xflrkhqaz udfmojlwk
June 19, 2008 9:25 AM | Report Offensive Comment
rbzkunliv qnxhrde zirf eamtrjknd gvtixc xflrkhqaz udfmojlwk
June 19, 2008 9:24 AM | Report Offensive Comment
zmcdgef ikeqd kihr mazwygdn zxrcbnia evaonc uwdsxjbq
June 19, 2008 9:21 AM | Report Offensive Comment
zmcdgef ikeqd kihr mazwygdn zxrcbnia evaonc uwdsxjbq
June 19, 2008 9:21 AM | Report Offensive Comment
zmcdgef ikeqd kihr mazwygdn zxrcbnia evaonc uwdsxjbq
June 19, 2008 9:21 AM | Report Offensive Comment
oiymnlrjf acgnlz ecdjvz gwftyh szprq pweu rkdvzfua
June 19, 2008 9:20 AM | Report Offensive Comment
oiymnlrjf acgnlz ecdjvz gwftyh szprq pweu rkdvzfua
June 19, 2008 9:19 AM | Report Offensive Comment
oiymnlrjf acgnlz ecdjvz gwftyh szprq pweu rkdvzfua
June 19, 2008 9:19 AM | Report Offensive Comment
oiymnlrjf acgnlz ecdjvz gwftyh szprq pweu rkdvzfua
June 19, 2008 9:18 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Hj8gQr Cool, bro!
March 19, 2008 2:17 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Hj8gQr Cool, bro!
March 19, 2008 2:16 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Hj8gQr Cool, bro!
March 19, 2008 2:16 AM | Report Offensive Comment
When the sun novas, we'll pretty much be toast.
That's how it will end and it will be as if we never existed.
Mike
April 13, 2007 12:43 PM | Report Offensive Comment
When the sun novas, we'll pretty much be toast.
That's how it will end and it will be as if we never existed.
Mike
April 13, 2007 12:42 PM | Report Offensive Comment
When the sun novas, we'll pretty much be toast.
That's how it will end and it will be as if we never existed.
Mike
April 13, 2007 12:41 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
You still around? I still would like to talk to you. Hope all is well. Please respond and maybe we can begin where we left off.
April 12, 2007 6:57 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---Proof that [Jesus' words were recorded second and third hand] isnt true:
http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-authors.html
Also look at the timeline and would it not be possible that these authors lived to actually see Jesus' testimony? ---
Hmmm, good reference which I think proves my point. The authors of the NT wrote it many years "AD" meaning after death, up to 90 years AD. Some were with Jesus, many others were not. The entire bible according to your site was written by 40 people over 1500 years. Some stories are verified by other authors, some are lone accounts of what happened. Of course, if you put a brand of "God's word" on the whole book, what's to argue? I will consider those stories told by multiple authors but I'll question the lone author. And again, the catholics cherry picked the bible's contents. Not all NT writings are represented.
---Also, relate the timeline of Daniel's and Isaiah's writing and relate them to prophetical outcomes. But since you think the those are bunk, research into end time prophecies. Such as the woman on the beast (the catholic church), the woman riding on a beast by the way is a church siding with the antichrist which explains this church to be located between 7 hills within rome, hence the Vatican, single monetary sytem (the euro), the resurrection of the roman empire (the U.N. and the E.U.), the sign of the beast (not positive but check out http://www.verichipcorp.com/ ---
Every century has had people claim the world was coming to an end based on biblical prophesy and what was going on that century, even before Christ appeared. I remember my mother saying that WW2 was prophesised and she thought, as a young girl, it meant the end of the world. Hitler was the antichrist she said. I remember those sayng the year 2000 would be the end. You should have been around in the 1960s with nuclear war an imminent threat. I was ducking and covering in school. The end of the world is nothing new. And look at your own words! The EU is the resurrection of the Roman Empire? I remember when the USA was called that by some who said the end was near. The UN? The UN is not a government but a committee which has no army or unitary force, which is why it is so hard for it to do anything, which is the way it was designed.
It seems to me that very old text, obviously out of context, and interpreting it to represent present day conditions ought to be easy. Lets see ... I'll pick a random prophesy from Nostradamus and twist it into what I like. I found quatrainne XI2:
---
"How much gold and silver will have to be spent
When the Count will desire to take the town,
Many thousands and thousands of soldiers,
Drowned, killed, without doing anything there,
In stronger land will he set foot,
Pygmy aid by the Copy-holders"
---
Ok, let see:
-spend money = spend national treasure
-Count takes town = president takes Baghdad.
-soldiers killed = soldiers killed
-without doing anything = a stalemate
-stronger land = USA
-Pygmy aid = Bush, a pygmy to Cheney
-Copy-holders = hmmm, had to look up the definition: mechanical device used in printing.
So this OBVIOUSLY is a reference to, oh my, our current war in Iraq (how coincidental!). It is saying that Bush launched a war for naught, it drew to a stalemate but many soldiers were killed. In the end Bush, the leader of the stong land (USA) was really a small aid to the real power, the print media, meaning Fox News. My God! Nostradamus predicted it! Hey, this is fun!
---So, prophecy could likely be working today. Then what do you say?---
I say prophesy is bunk or people would be reading propheses and going out and putting money strategically in the stock market and getting wealthy based on prophesy. Church leaders who claim to know prophesy would be very wealthy, which they are but not by making money that way.
But what actually happens is not prediction of coming events that come to pass but instead taking prophesy to point out events that are happening or have recently happened. Few actually stand in the street proclaiming midnight will be the end of the world though thousands have. Most just tell you its coming. And like a fortune teller make it as vague as possible. Pat Robertson came close when he predicted with prayer that he could turn a hurricane. It didn't turn but he had an out, not enough people prayed!
---Once again you used an OT testament concerning rape. (2 Samuel). And like I said before maybe you should ask a Jew since christians do not live by the law but by grace. That subject there is basic philosophy that you SHOULD understand.---
You have been telling me that the bible is the word of God. I have been saying that God seems to have changed over time but you say he has not. I then point out where God prescribes a neighbor raping a man's wife in front of him as God's punishment for the man and you say I'm taking it out of context. So is the bible God's word or is it, the OT anyway, just Jewish law written by jewish men in the context of the day who say its God's word but is not?
And I do understand the basic phylosophy. I just don't see it practiced by many who call themselves christian and I see many christians ignore that overall phylosophy of love and take snipets of the bible, twist the meaning, and use it as validation for hateful acts, such as "an eye for an eye". Many Christians today are for the death penalty. Talk about hipocracy...
---Well, gotta run. My wifes buggin me. Thanks again Fate. Have a great week.---
I plan to. Lots of eggs to dye and hide. Oh my, is coloring easter eggs and hiding them in the OT, the NT, or am I performing a pagan act?
---And I think I'll pass on the book. Thanks anyway, I'd rather not think about such things as I sit and lay back on the beach to enjoy God's creation. :) I thought you might like that.... :)---
While you're in Hawaii do some sight seeing. Note the lava flows. Note how the islands are continuing to grow. Note on a map the islands, how they get bigger as you go east. Maybe talk to a park ranger and learn about the "hot spot" under Hawaii and how the earth's crust has moved over millions of years over the hot spot. Also note the wildlife, how it is not the same as where you live but similar, but perfectly adapted for life in Hawaii. Once you see the world for what it is, you will see that nature is a very natural thing, with no need for a God. Only then you can begin to really appreciate the wonder of life on this planet and how precious it is, and we are.
April 4, 2007 10:34 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Thanks for this very informative blog. I think it is time, however, we all start learning from our differences rather than fighting about them. Never before has society been so divided. This is a time we all need to come forward with mutual respect and goodwill towards all. I truly beieve in a much bigger God than the one we have all obviously heard of for so long.
Rather it be the Christian God, Muslim God, or Budha! (whatever!) We are all in this thing called- ~life~ together!
We should all hope for peace to be shared together. As well, for each to have their own peace respectively. No matter which concept of God one blieves their own truth! Why would one who tuly knows God within want any thing less for another human being. I beg to know the answer to this...
Futher by forcing our own superiorty of belief forward, over others equally as dedicated to a different belief, is truly, in my mind anyway, not indicitive of having deep peace within as touted otherwise in their faith. Love your differences! (some may say enemies) And allow each the right to have their own truth.
If you are secure with your own beliefs truly, you shouldn't have a need to prove it to others, nor force your rules on any self-governing body of people. Wear your respective religions in your heart where it belongs, and not thurst on others.
All extreme religions are dangerous. And I think we are seeing that now in our own country. The rise of Christain Nationalism has been nothing but decisive to our country, and I would think, to the very messege Christians want to put forth. Rather it be Pat Robinson or other
fundlementalist christian counterparts, or rather it be Osma and his counterparts as well, the taliban, makes no difference.
Both are overly rigid to the non believer of their faith, and to the like believer as well....
And BOTH are out of mainstream to their own perspective societies. Yet, I stil do struggle, nonetheless, to understand the Christian perspective these days. I do repect thier deep rooted faith, but I beg to know why they feel I am the one intolerant bcause I don't want to embrace a theocracy in my country, as with how it was with, the Taliban, in Afghanistan. On the contrary, it feels to me that is what Christian Nationalist seek. Oppression is relevant to all. Even when it is not as overt as the Taliban. Please help to understand the differences.
As A matter of fact, the similarities seem too eerily close. On another note, I personaly do not believe in the concept of Hell. But if ones needs to believe in that concept, as one much more articulate than I once said "I'ts your Hell, So you Burn it" Sad if that is your choice though.. because I truly think happiness and peace for all us, regardless, is the best alternative. I know For myself, though, that whatever heaven is... wherever it is in it's Glory... God indeed has it for me! And, no, I do not fear death....
On the other hand, I do fear, what we can do to each other here on earth!
Peace to you...
April 4, 2007 3:14 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
I'm just out the door to get to the airport but I wanted so badly to see your response. Really briefly let me clarify a couple of things.
You said,
The bible was made by taking writings that were made after Christ died by people who were there but no longer alive. So Jesus' words were recorded second and third hand.
Proof that isnt true:
http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-authors.html
Also look at the timeline and would it not be possible that these authors lived to actually see Jesus' testimony? Also, relate the timeline of Daniel's and Isaiah's writing and relate them to prophetical outcomes. But since you think the those are bunk, research into end time prophecies. Such as the woman on the beast (the catholic church), the woman riding on a beast by the way is a church siding with the antichrist which explains this church to be located between 7 hills within rome, hence the Vatican, single monetary sytem (the euro), the resurrection of the roman empire (the U.N. and the E.U.), the sign of the beast (not positive but check out http://www.verichipcorp.com/
So, prophecy could likely be working today. Then what do you say?
Once again you used an OT testament concerning rape. (2 Samuel). And like I said before maybe you should ask a Jew since christians do not live by the law but by grace. That subject there is basic philosophy that you SHOULD understand.
Well, gotta run. My wifes buggin me. Thanks again Fate. Have a great week. And I think I'll pass on the book. Thanks anyway, I'd rather not think about such things as I sit and lay back on the beach to enjoy God's creation. :) I thought you might like that.... :)
April 3, 2007 4:26 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---First off, rape. In no way does God "command" as you say to rape anyone.---
Check out: 2 Samuel 12:11-14
"Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.' Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die."
So God punishes David by having David's neighbor rape his wives. God also kills David's child whom I assume was innocent of anything David did. Also check out: Deuteronomy 21:10-14. I have pointed out these passages in the bible in earlier postings, maybe you missed them. Rape was required by God of captives in many conflicts (after giving the rape victim time to mourn the murder of her parents of course).
---To clarify the subject of the Hebrews. Yes they are chosen by God to prove Himself through their bloodline. God vowed that they as a people would be a part of history from beginning to end. It was not until Jesus' time that Jews and Gentiles alike could recieve salvation from God. Once again that is basic Christian philosophy and proves you really do not have any knowledge in the subject.---
Yet you say God has not changed from the OT to the NT. But he did in that he now considers Jews just as equal with respect to getting into heaven as gentiles. What happened to gentiles during OT times? Were they denied heaven for a reason? Why did God change his mind about gentiles? If he changed his mind he is not immutable.
---No the Bible clearly states the determination of true nature in the first two verses of the Bible which I have shown you. Not much is specified and probably could not have been since scientific means were not around then.---
But these are the words of God. Does He not know science? I would be very impressed if he said light has no mass, the universe is expanding, or that there were other planets or even stars. None of this was known at the time by man so I'm not surprised God didn't know it either.
---How can all these denominations have so much in common but enough to split them apart. They all use the Bible in their own terms which is why organized religion has been perverted. But a lot of these denominations have similiar conclusions.---
I agree. I think it shows the power religion has and how some people want their own version of that power. The Catholic church was from the beginning the sole power of christianity. A good reading of Henry VIII might help explain how man, as you say, perverted thr religion. But I would go back to Christ who disagreed with the Rabbis of his day and basically split off Judiasm into another faction, christianity. As I see it, its just man being man.
---Oh and great Einstein knows about gravity? How was gravity made? And do you know what made the products that made gravity?---
All good questions which you will not find answers to in the bible. But answers to questions like that have been found through scientific research.
---And you still deny the fact that the Bible is an historically correct document.---
Yes.
---So I guess the Constitution of the United States must not be legal historical fact either because there is no one alive today that saw it signed.---
Good point. History and documentation are important. The constitution was witnessed, signed, duplicated and spread thoughout the colonies. The consensus at the time was that it was real as signers of the time verified. That is why it is signed and by so many people and multiple copies were made and each digned. They knew as we know today that for a document to have validity it cannot be created in secret and its origins kept secret. The bible was made by taking writings that were made after Christ died by people who were there but no longer alive. So Jesus' words were recorded second and third hand. Then these documents were accumulated and church leaders picked some and discarded others. They did not include them all because there were conflicts. The gnostic writings were discarded. A few were taken as 100% correct and included. I find it hard to imagine that the scripture reviewed at the time was either completely correct or completely wrong and that the people making these decisions were completely right. So I feel the NT is simply what the early christian leaders put together based on their understanding of christianity at that time. I feel the NT reflects the thinking of the early christians but is not a complete historical document and I would not be surprised it has errors. Which are errors and which are correct I cannot say. No one can. I will take the ones multiple authors agreed on and question the parts that have inconsistencies or have only one author.
---And how do we know that wasnt just last thursday? If you cannot recognize the Bible as historically accurate then there is no reason for this debate.---
It could have been last Thursday, it could have been 6000 years ago. God's capabilities are infinite. If you are going to take the bible to be as accurate as, say, the constitution, then you need to go back and read how the bible was put together to understand how much of it can be trusted.
---And if man is fallible in their writings in the Bible maybe man is fallible in their scientific research?---
I completely agree! I have worked in the lab. I know how you can run an experiment three times and get three different answers. Science trusts only in repeatability, mathematical analysis and the accumulation of evidence. I would put the bible in that last category. The authors of the bible seem to agree on the life of Jesus and I have no doubt he existed. But you also need to understand that miracles were being performed at the same time by many other people. Also remember that Mohammed is credited with miracles of his own that were documented. Do you doubt those miracles? Because they are documented, probably better, than the bible's:
http://www.jews-for-allah.org/Muhammad-and-Judaism/miracles-of-mohammed.htm
---So once again you make claims to your reasoning but put mine on higher standards.---
I don't see how.
---Its wonderful how God used you (someone I do not even know or even agree with) to show me his awesomeness.---
It was 80 degrees yesterday, I took a walk at lunch. Was he showing me how pleased he was for helping you? Its amazing how a belief in a God can make you imagine anything.
---To be honest this is the first time I have ever debated the issue of God and I think God used this to inspire me to seek His word even further.---
Good. I like to question everything. It got me beaten by nuns in catholic school but I've never regreted it. Truth is too important.
---Everything I challenge on both sides of the debate continue to press me in the belief of God and of Jesus. One cannot just read the Bible to understand its message but must study it over and over again to gain the true wisdom that comes from it, just like science does.---
Science has a much higher standard since belief is not a valid reason to accept something as real. Religion and science have no comparison. Only one involves reason, thinking and proof.
---All in all I think we all look for a meaning to life and the reasoning behind it whether it be scientifically or spiritually. For me, spirituality seems to answer the questions science could never prove.---
As I pointed out before, religion explained the sun until nuclear fusion was discovered. Spirituality needs to be understood. Like a tree falling in the forest, would there be spirituality if man became extinct?
---If all we are are a bunch of particles that will cease to exist, the meaning for this debate is purposeless.---
Not at all. If you ever come to the conclusion that you are the result of particles forming life and evolving into you over billions of years, the wonder of it all is much more immense than God waving a wand. Some people study hurricanes, others tornadoes and are impressed that they form out of nothing to grow and yield such destructive power. I am impressed with life having formed, evolved and organized into multicellular organisms like ourselves.
---Why would you care to enlighten me on your theories if we're all just a bunch of particles that will soon evaporate. Why not just let me live my lie and my fantasy since it makes me happy?---
Fair question. Just look at what those who are living the fantasy have done to our government and our laws which affects us all. What I consider your delusion does affect me and others just as you may feel Pat Robertson affects your religion. By pointing out the delusion I'm trying to get some sanity back into society.
---But for me its the teachings of Christ that give reason to this debate. Us being taught to love one another and to truly love someone we would want that person to experience to love Christ has for all of us.---
As I've said I use the bible's parobles as I use Aesops, to learn how to treat my fellow man in a good way. Man is not some out of control killer that needs religion to make him civil. Human society, like animal societies, live well without religion. But morality really means not breaking the golden rule, not treating someone in a way you would not want them to treat you. It always comes back to the golden rule. That is what I find separates us from the animals, that we can empathise for each other thanks to our unique frontal lobe, the site of human reasoning and unique to humans.
---And if science cannot come up with a meaning of life then why should you care. Science doesn't teach you to care. Human instinct? Not really if we are all just a bunch of particles waiting to not exist.---
I agree. Morality is not the rhelm of science. Yet people, religious and not, seem to be able to get along just fine in most cases.
---Its been a heck of a debate Fate. [...] I cannot debate with someone who claims to have knowledge of the Bible but shows otherwise. It would therefore be pointless. I tried to show you the true meanings in the Bible but you refuse to accept them even though you clearly wanted answers.---
Your answers require complete belief in the bible's correctness. That is something I and even many who are believers do not agree with.
Enjoy Hawaii and maybe pick up a copy of "The God Delusion" to read on the beach. I haven't read it and its controversial in its attacks on religion, but it might keep your search for the truth going. My life phylosophy is that "people are stupid", which includes myself so its ok when I make a mistake but also keeps me aware of my flaws so I'm careful. I'm also tolerent of other people being stupid, running red lights and such. Human stupidity is prevalent which I think is obvious but rarely admitted. To improve ourselves we need to acknowledge our flaws and face up to them, even if it means questioning what we have been taught as an absolute truth since childhood.
April 3, 2007 10:18 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
Once again you continue to either miss the point or dismiss it before even thinking about it. First off, rape. In no way does God "command" as you say to rape anyone. I think tolerance is the issue. As a Christian, we do not follow the ways of the OT so I suggest asking someone who follows Judaism why it is tolerated. You claim to know the teachings of the Bible but it is very clear that you have no idea what you are talking about. To claim God changed from the OT to the NT is obsurd and to make such a claim constitutes for a misinterpretation of God.
You say man is fallible which he is but wrote the Bible which they did. But scripture has proven itself to be the divine Word of God through prophecy in which subject you still want to avoid. That's fine ignore that if you will. I guess I can take my pick and choose of the points you make too. Oh and please continue to forget how I asked how the particles to people theory could ever be proved in that something (actually someone, ID) HAD to have to created that.
To clarify the subject of the Hebrews. Yes they are chosen by God to prove Himself through their bloodline. God vowed that they as a people would be a part of history from beginning to end. It was not until Jesus' time that Jews and Gentiles alike could recieve salvation from God. Once again that is basic Christian philosophy and proves you really do not have any knowledge in the subject.
you said,
You trust the bible but the bible has done a very poor job determining the true nature of the universe. So why do you think they got it right about the true nature of God?
No the Bible clearly states the determination of true nature in the first two verses of the Bible which I have shown you. Not much is specified and probably could not have been since scientific means were not around then. Sorry Moses did not know about the theory of relativity or even gravity. Those verses can be left open to debate but they truly do leave open the fact that God has been before creation and also a supposed billions of years into the geological era. And I do disagree with a lot of things catholics do but some are agreeable with Christianity. How can all these denominations have so much in common but enough to split them apart. They all use the Bible in their own terms which is why organized religion has been perverted. But a lot of these denominations have similiar conclusions.
Oh and great Einstein knows about gravity? How was gravity made? And do you know what made the products that made gravity?
And you still deny the fact that the Bible is an historically correct document. So I guess the Constitution of the United States must not be legal historical fact either because there is no one alive today that saw it signed. And how do we know that wasnt just last thursday? If you cannot recognize the Bible as historically accurate then there is no reason for this debate. And if man is fallible in their writings in the Bible maybe man is fallible in their scientific research? You cannot continue to hold the Bible to higher accounts of criticism than any other legal historical document. And you cannot discredit man for writing it when its man that pushes the claim for science. I do believe science to be a correct method in determining specific findings so I must trust in man. As so with the Bible.
So once again you make claims to your reasoning but put mine on higher standards. I guess all I can do is hope that you can humble yourself even just a little to think about what I'm saying for minute and not just what your saying. All in all its been a good debate that needs to end sometime. Its wonderful how God used you (someone I do not even know or even agree with) to show me his awesomeness. To be honest this is the first time I have ever debated the issue of God and I think God used this to inspire me to seek His word even further. Everything I challenge on both sides of the debate continue to press me in the belief of God and of Jesus. One cannot just read the Bible to understand its message but must study it over and over again to gain the true wisdom that comes from it, just like science does. All in all I think we all look for a meaning to life and the reasoning behind it whether it be scientifically or spiritually. For me, spirituality seems to answer the questions science could never prove. If all we are are a bunch of particles that will cease to exist, the meaning for this debate is purposeless. Why would you care to enlighten me on your theories if we're all just a bunch of particles that will soon evaporate. Why not just let me live my lie and my fantasy since it makes me happy? But for me its the teachings of Christ that give reason to this debate. Us being taught to love one another and to truly love someone we would want that person to experience to love Christ has for all of us. There may be no scientific evidence for how Christ can change lives but He has to millions of people over a span of centuries. And if science cannot come up with a meaning of life then why should you care. Science doesn't teach you to care. Human instinct? Not really if we are all just a bunch of particles waiting to not exist.
Its been a heck of a debate Fate. Im going on vacation tomorrow so I wont be checking this site for at least a week. And from recent responses from you, I think the debate is over. I cannot debate with someone who claims to have knowledge of the Bible but shows otherwise. It would therefore be pointless. I tried to show you the true meanings in the Bible but you refuse to accept them even though you clearly wanted answers. Thanks for your input Fate and I learned a lot from you. Things I do not think I could have learned from anyone else. I'll keep you in my prayers and will always hope the best for you. Maybe one day we'll see each others point of views but maybe not. As long as we have a mutual respect I'm good with that. Take care. And HAWAII HERE I COME!! I need a tan.
April 3, 2007 3:09 AM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---God has never changed since the beginning until now.---
No? If the Hebrews are his chosen people how will christians get into heaven? They are not Hebrew therefore not chosen. When did God change the rules and allow non-Hebrews into heaven?
Why do you think this contradicts the immutability of God? After all, both Old and New Testaments agree 100% percent on this, since it is the New that quotes the Old saying:
And, "Thou, Lord, didst found the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of thy hands; they will perish, but thou remainest; they will all grow old like a garment, like a mantle thou wilt roll them up, and they will be changed. But thou art the same, and thy years will never end."
(Heb 1:10-12 RSVA)
How can _anyone_ come up with a reasonable interpretation of this passage _without_ realizing it implies the immutability of God?
April 3, 2007 1:26 AM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---God has never changed since the beginning until now.---
No? If the Hebrews are his chosen people how will christians get into heaven? They are not Hebrew therefore not chosen. When did God change the rules and allow non-Hebrews into heaven?
---Regarding your verses in Deuteronomy:
22:28-29. Rape by force is mentioned here. But you must understand it culturally to understand its true meaning.---
I understand that women had no rights and the bible (God's word) tried to place some rules on a culture where women had no rights, launching wars on other societies was normal, and defining rules (laws) for what to do if a woman was raped. But what you are doing in your defense of the bible is placing it in a cultural context. Does God's laws exist in a cultural context or are they absolute? If your daughter was raped should the judge the rapist is brought before fine him 50 dollars to be given to you and tell the rapist he must marry your daughter? Are we more moral than God because our society today has determined rape is unacceptable in any context?
---No I could not prove scientifically that I was not born last Thursday or even the actual date I was born. But ask the eye witnesses to the account and also my birth certificate and you would come to the conclusion of my date of birth.---
And if all of the witnesses and the documents were also created last Thursday? If the world was created in place with people, their memories, documents etc, all created last Thursday, you could not prove it correct or incorrect. So I am free to believe it is true and there is no way you could prove it wrong, scientifically or otherwise. But just because you cannot prove it wrong does not make it right and the burden of proving it right is on me and not on you to prove wrong. Yet you want me to prove the bible wrong. I have tried to show inconsistencies, God's acceptance of rape, and the incorrect statements in the bible of the earth's age and creation of animals at once and unchanging. The evidence of these being incorrect is overwhelming but it seems the burden is still on me somehow.
---Your right in saying that these men were catholics who decided the original canon. But it was not until the time of Martin Luther that the Bible we have today came into play.---
Maybe we can agree that the bible may not contain all the accurate writings of the time? And it might even be possible some of what got into the bible was not correct but seemed correct? In other words, Christ's words were written corectly or incorrectly by men, saved or destroyed over time, accumulated by men, determined by men for their worth and addition to the bible. Man is fallible yet the bible is taken as perfect. How can that be?
---1:1 In the beginning 1 God 2 created 3 the heavens and the earth. 4 1:2 Now 5 the earth 6 was without shape and empty, 7 and darkness 8 was over the surface of the watery deep, 9 but the Spirit of God 10 was moving 11 over the surface 12 of the water. 13 I wonder how long God was just chillin before He created the earth as we know it today. Possibly billions of years? This verse leads to the openness that it could very well be possible this earth is billions of years old.---
Careful, that's what the catholics say. They also accept that evolution is just another of God's plans. For me its just the religion giving up in the face of overwhelming evidence and accepting reality or looking stupid, as the creationists look stupid. This process has been going on since the first days of the church. Stars are now distant suns, planets are not stars, the universe is very large, no shell (firmamant) exists, the earth revolves around the sun. etc., etc., etc...
---I am really glad you made me challenge both sides, science and God. Because maybe its just possible that science is proving God right now.---
Unlikely. As I showed in the above paragraph, science is pretty much proving some of the bible is wrong, the OT anyway, in the earth's age, the evolution of life. And wrong morally (rape, war, etc) though that is not science's relm.
---And when was time invented? If the world really is 15 billion years old, how much time was before that? That would be inconcievable to the human mind as only a finite God could understand. Is it not more probable that God created time when He created the 7 day week? Science can only bring you to a certain point in logical thinking which therefore you have to ask questions as to how could such perfection be created and how long were we in limbo before these particles started to make us?---
Time is my favorite subject. Einstein found it is relative and it has been proved that time in the presense of gravity runs slower. The astronauts in the space station are actually aging a little faster, ending up a few milliseconds older than if they stayed on earth. Not much but it has been scientifically measured. You trust the bible but the bible has done a very poor job determining the true nature of the universe. So why do you think they got it right about the true nature of God?
Do you know what the firmament is? Its the light shining through a dome covering a flat earth from heaven. Stars were not thought to be other suns in the perfect bible. That dome was fixed so comets and shooting stars were never recorded by christian historians. The supernova of 1054 which is now the crab nebula would have made the star appear brighter than venus, yet no mention of it in christian Europe, but lots of observations in non-christian China. One can only wonder what truths are being suppressed today by the church in the name of keeping the faith. Maybe the creationists are the keepers of the faith today.
---First of all Pat Robertson is a knucklehead.---
No argument from me here...
---Secondly, you NEED to look at when the books of the Bible were written. How could Kind David (1000 years B.C.) know that Christ would come one day and be "hung on a tree."---
Because hanging people on trees is an ancient method of torturous death known to King David.
---Also knowing that "not one bone would be broken," when roman tradition clearly states that when one is crucified his legs must be broken to ensure of his death. Both of those who were crucified had their legs broken. And David refers to Jesus "the one they pierced," hence the fact that he was pierced in his side with a sword. How could David had known these things 1000 years before they happened including roman tradition when the roman empire wasnt even established yet and that that tradition would be broken only with Jesus unless it was an inspired Word of God?---
We know Christ did not write anything. We know his deciples believed firmly he was the messiah. They were also Jews who knew the prophesies. So, you have very religious people who believe Chirst was the son of God and know he had to therefore fulfill the prophesies. Then they wrote down what they did. I'm not saying they lied, or mislead or embelished their text, just that it is possible. Fallible man again.
---And please tell me how Christianity could sustain for 2000 years without undeniable proof that God does not exist? Prophecy is real, you just need to check your historical dates.---
Constantine spreading christianity through war, the early accumulation of wealth by the christian church thanks to Constantine, the missionary movement to spread christianity, initially by monks but later by lay people. The incorporation of the church into governments, the inquisition suppressing truth, the pope elevated to a supreme position above kings, ... I could go on. Maybe you should ask why Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Jainism, and Taoism are older than christianity but still around. And the "three wise men" were the likely Zoroastrians based on their astrological abilities and the types of gifts given. Funny, astrology today is not considered devine by christians even though it worked to find the baby Jesus. Why?
April 3, 2007 12:33 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
You said,
Maybe you think God cares for even the smallest things, but I wonder why he bothered making the rest of it and why he keeps changing the rules (Garden of Eden, then no garden, the the Hebrew God of wrath, now the loving God of Christ). Maybe we are not evolving but God is?
God has never changed since the beginning until now. I gave you an example in Ezekial of God's patience before their judgement. And I gave you an example in Matthew about how Jesus' message was not to bring peace but the sword. God has never changed from the OT to the NT. He has and always will be a God of love and a God of judgement. Why do we call Him "Father in Heaven?" Because just like a father He loves us unconditionally but will punish us for going against what he says. If we are to never be punished for our sins then how are we to ever learn from our mistakes? You interpretation of God has been misleading you.
Regarding your verses in Deuteronomy:
21:10-14 does not mention the act of rape and therefore cannot be accounted for.
22:28-29. Rape by force is mentioned here. But you must understand it culturally to understand its true meaning. First off lets look at the word 'rape' as it was translated to English.
http://jot.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/3/279?ck=nck
No word for 'rape' was ever found in Biblical Hebrew. And culturally what is found (and still is today)is the act of arranged marriages. In ancient times women had no rights. They were given into marriage per their fathers approval without consent from the woman. Virginity was common until marriage unless categorized as a prostitute. For whomever the woman loses their virginity to would become their husband as declared in the passages. The fiftly shekels is payment to the father since his rights in giving away his daughter to a man were taken. Back then there were no sexual ethics, just sex. And sex constituted the union between a man and a woman "to become one flesh." But no payment would be made to the father if an arranged marriage was accepted by the father. But as far as the 'rape' that we use as a word today, to force someone without consent to a sexual act, could not apply to ancient Biblical times without the force of payment and marriage to the woman. The difference between rape these days and rape in those days is the accountability. Their laws consitute the man to marry the woman compared to these days as rape could only be a violent act which upon to leave the woman with no dignity. But, according to the NT we no longer live by the laws anymore for salvation, but live by grace with which salvation comes to those who believe.
First let me say that I will look up this dino hemoglobin article and get back to you. Now, as to the question of how to prove something that cannot be repeated. This happens every day. History for example. Was your house built by God or carpenters assuming you did not watch it being built or someone did not record it on film. How do you know you were born and not just created last Thursday? You can't prove you were not.
Exactly!! By no scientific means could I prove these things. Only by legal historical fact. For example: Being born last Thursday. No I could not prove scientifically that I was not born last Thursday or even the actual date I was born. But ask the eye witnesses to the account and also my birth certificate and you would come to the conclusion of my date of birth.
Whoe. Christ left no writings so all of the NT is second hand information. The Council of Nicea threw out a lot of writings to get to the four authors who basically agreed with each other, though not 100%. And those council members were catholics, the ones you say you do not trust. How can you accept the catholic bible but not catholocism? How can trust those who culled through the writings of others in Christ's day and put together the few we call the bible? You are trusting the judgement of people building a religion at the time. That means building power. Assuming it was all done in good faith ignores the sinful nature of all men
Your right in saying that these men were catholics who decided the original canon. But it was not until the time of Martin Luther that the Bible we have today came into play. The council of Nicea was mainly a debate over the Trinity belief system and whether God the Father was before Jesus the Son or were they one in the same. They concluded that the Trinity was the correct form due to OT passages proving this to be correct. The Apogrypha and Psedopygripha were added by roman catholic bishops but then later regarded as false doctrine due to historical inaccuracies and inconsistencies with OT scripture. Furthermore, your right in saying Christ left no writings of His own. But it was eyewitness accounts, not just from Christians but from roman authorities as well (Pontius Pilate) that verified the testimony of Jesus.
I find something quite interesting in the first two verses of the Bible:
1:1 In the beginning 1 God 2 created 3 the heavens and the earth. 4
1:2 Now 5 the earth 6 was without shape and empty, 7 and darkness 8 was over the surface of the watery deep, 9 but the Spirit of God 10 was moving 11 over the surface 12 of the water. 13
I wonder how long God was just chillin before He created the earth as we know it today. Possibly billions of years? This verse leads to the openness that it could very well be possible this earth is billions of years old. And that maybe its mankind that has seen this world in such a short time period according to chronology of the Bible. I am really glad you made me challenge both sides, science and God. Because maybe its just possible that science is proving God right now. And when was time invented? If the world really is 15 billion years old, how much time was before that? That would be inconcievable to the human mind as only a finite God could understand. Is it not more probable that God created time when He created the 7 day week? Science can only bring you to a certain point in logical thinking which therefore you have to ask questions as to how could such perfection be created and how long were we in limbo before these particles started to make us?
You said,
The prophesies that were written about AFTER they happened? You're sounding like Pat Robertson (sorry, not intending to offend).
First of all Pat Robertson is a knucklehead. He thinks the world is gonna end this year when it clearly states in the Bible that no man will know the time but will only heed the warnings. He thinks he knows the time which is contradictory to true Christianity. Secondly, you NEED to look at when the books of the Bible were written. How could Kind David (1000 years B.C.) know that Christ would come one day and be "hung on a tree." Also knowing that "not one bone would be broken," when roman tradition clearly states that when one is crucified his legs must be broken to ensure of his death. Both of those who were crucified had their legs broken. And David refers to Jesus "the one they pierced," hence the fact that he was pierced in his side with a sword. How could David had known these things 1000 years before they happened including roman tradition when the roman empire wasnt even established yet and that that tradition would be broken only with Jesus unless it was an inspired Word of God? And please tell me how Christianity could sustain for 2000 years without undeniable proof that God does not exist? Prophecy is real, you just need to check your historical dates.
April 2, 2007 6:15 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---...research Dr. Mary Schweitzer. She recently found soft tissue in a T-rex bone which contained hemoglobin.---
Please read the following website which points out the exagerations of the find:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC371.html
Now that you say you understand the creationist lies you should use the www.talkorigins.org site to get to the truth on creationist claims, which is what this site does. One thing you should have initially done when you heard the claim was question why, up until Schweitzer, all dino bones were found fossilized with no hemoglobin or DNA. If dinos were around a few thousand years ago a lot of tissue would be found in dino bones and this would not be news. Scientists have enough DNA from mammoths to consider cloning one for example. They were killed by the flood as were the dinos according to the creationists. You don't need years of scientific training to see a con job. You just need to not take everything that supports the bible at face value and ask questions. You should also ask yourself why people need to lie to reinforce the belief.
April 2, 2007 2:44 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---But the idea of creatinism is still a valid scientific point in that evolution really has no definitive answer. How can something be proven without being able to repeat it? All other means of science use this method to prove their findings except evolutionism. How can one recreate the earth and all living things except God?---
First let me say that I will look up this dino hemoglobin article and get back to you. Now, as to the question of how to prove something that cannot be repeated. This happens every day. History for example. Was your house built by God or carpenters assuming you did not watch it being built or someone did not record it on film. How do you know you were born and not just created last Thursday? You can't prove you were not.
Evolution initially began by fossil studies and studying living creatures that seemed relates (dogs & cats for example). Since the dates of the fossils were important methods of dating fossils or the sediments they were found in became a science of its own. Its used not only for fossil dating but archeological dating, the same archeology you initially said proved God existed. Its also used in geology to determine oil and gas deposits. But back to evolution, as fossil finds accumulated hypotheses were formed, such as one species evolving into another over time. If the hypothesis was correct there should be a fossil of an intermediate form during a time in between the fossils in question. Many of these were found for many species. The gaps creationists used to claim was a problem in evolution in 1920 began to close. Some species have complete fossil records today. Many do not but have gaps which continue to close.
One question evolutionists have debated over was recently solved. If mammals evolved from reptiles, where did the ear bones we use to hear with come from. It looked like reptiles had these tiny bones but they were part of the jaw. No intermediate animal was discovered that had something in between. Evolution does not allow such an abrupt change since evolution is gradual. The hunt for an intermediary animal, half reptile half mammal is was thought. Just recently a reptile was discovered that had the bones in an intermediate configuration. Evolutionists were suprised it was found in a reptile and not some reptile/mammal intermediary or an early mammal. So their initial hypothesis was wrong, that it would not be found in a reptile, but their prediction that an intemediary had to exist was right. The evidence is currently being review by other scientists.
Up until the 1980s the evolutionary evidence was mainly fossil based and the "tree of life" showing how species branched off from extinct species was made. Then DNA was discovered and DNA sequencing of many animals began and continues today. When you look at the DNA differences it follows the "tree of life", well, almost. There are some surprises though not big enough to toss it all. Some species were found to be related more closely or le ss close to different fossils than we thought. Still, the agreement between the DNA and fossil evidence is very high. You do not need to repeat something to show how it happened anymore than a forensic investigator needs to repeat a homocide to determine what likely happened. And in the case of evolution, the earth contains millions of years of evidence still be gathered.
---And once again what created all those particles that became people? And where did they come from? Admitting to not being able to answer those questions has left serious doubt in the minds of many scientists.---
Doubt about what? Few scientists consider God when they do their work. Few if any scientists will find a question they cannot answer and proclaim the bible the obvious answer because the question cannot be answered today. Remember the church (and scientists of the day) thought the sun revolved around the earth? When Copernicus proved them wrong he was threatened with imprisonment for heresay. Maintaining religious doctrine at all costs did not begin with creationists.
---But evolutionists goal is to prove there is not God and we can sustain life without Him.---
No it is not. They are scientists looking at evidence, forming hypotheses and determining not only what happen as animals evolved but by what methods. God's existance is on few minds when they do their work anymore than He is on your mind when you do your work, which I assume is as mind numbing as mine. Evolution is not a religion. You need to get over that presentation by creationists. If it were no scientist would accept it anymore than they accept creationism.
---The problem with that is that without God we begin to feel like we can be God.---
We do? Explain. And what about believers who feel God is on their side, like Bush who feels he has God on his side and can flaunt the Constitution. The problem is that total belief in God can lead people to assume God approved of anything they do, like the ancient Hebrews.
---So, in conclusion to this statement I must admit that I was at fault for pointing out that creationist are valid scientists. You are right in that they have a pre-bias commitment to their false findings. But, evolutionists have a few questions that need to be answered for their theories to be correct too. Do not think that science is infallible? Because it isn't.---
We agree. Scientists are the last to trust a scientific finding until it is investigated, studied and rigorously peer reviewed. Many people buy snake oil hoping somehow the salesman was right, or buy magnets to heal sore knees. Most people believe anything. Scientists trust very little without evidence.
---You asked whether I go to a doctor or church when I get sick. Of course a doctor! God gave us science to help us.---
But it seems only if it is consistent with the religious texts. Science that shows the bible is flawed is somehow a belief in itself. You cannot call evolution a belief but cancer researchers true scientists. Both work using the same scientific methods.
---But, let me give you an example of science gone wrong, personally. My wife came across a condition known as Guillen Barre Syndrome. An auto immune system disorder that affects the nervous system. She was told it would be 6 months to a year to walk again and that it would require her to be in the hospital until she was able to walk. 8 weeks later she was discharged with a full recovery. They brought in specialists from around the bay area (thats where we live) and they all could not figure out how that could be possible. But through prayer, and faith my wife beat science. This experience acknowledges further Gods existence...at least to me.---
I googled the disease picked the first website: http://www.answers.com/topic/guillain-barr-syndrome
It says trhe following about the prognosis (how it will progress) will go:
"Most of those afflicted with GBS recover completely, although the recovery can in some cases be slow (months to years). Complete recovery usually occurs when the symptoms fade within three weeks of appearing. The typical scenario is for a patient to experience the most weakness from 10–14 days after the appearance of symptoms, with complete recovery occurring within weeks or a few months. In contrast, a poor prognosis can be associated with a rapid appearance of symptoms, use of assisted ventilation for a month or more, severe nerve damage, and with advancing age."
Sound like she had a normal recovery. Aren't you glad the doctors did not base the disease on deamons and try exorcism, or consider her a witch? Both have happened in christianity's past.
---You cannot count on chance as a means of diagnoses and scientific proof. The backbone of evolution is "by chance."---
No. Evolution is not the result of pure chance. It is the result of the death of the unfit, or as some call it, the survival of the fittest. No chance in there except the changes in the environment. But an animal's response to that change is predictable to some extent.
---Keep in mind that not everything can be scientifically proven.---
Yes it can. Just not everything can be scientifically proven with the science we have today.
---Can you prove you went to work last week scientifically? No but you can show a timecard and have witnesses to prove you were there. Legal historical facts. That is how the Bible is proven.---
Whoe. Christ left no writings so all of the NT is second hand information. The Council of Nicea threw out a lot of writings to get to the four authors who basically agreed with each other, though not 100%. And those council members were catholics, the ones you say you do not trust. How can you accept the catholic bible but not catholocism? How can trust those who culled through the writings of others in Christ's day and put together the few we call the bible? You are trusting the judgement of people building a religion at the time. That means building power. Assuming it was all done in good faith ignores the sinful nature of all men.
---Now God has given us freewill to believe or not to believe in His teachings. You choose not to believe even though His Word has been historically proven.---
I accept much in the bible. Love, underestanding, not casting first stones, etc... It is the concept of God himself I do not believe in. And again, his words (recorded by people don't forget) have not been historically proven. Where do you keep getting that. The words were written by Christs friends, long after he died. And other writers works were ignored. How can you just take some of the history, toss other records, and call it accurate and thus proof?
---But as an intelligent human being you must admit in the historical accuricies of the Bible.---
No.
---And once again I will refer to prophecy and how that is historically accurate with minute details involved.---
The prophesies that were written about AFTER they happened? You're sounding like Pat Robertson (sorry, not intending to offend).
---By the way, quit with accusing God of rape! Please quote some scripture so I could have some verification of that. I have already discussed reasoning behind the so called "genocide" performed by God.---
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 :
"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 :
"When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."
There are many more examples. Do you think 50 pieces of silver is just for the crime of rape? Can a women be kidnapped, say in Baghdad by an American soldier, after killing her parents and made to marry the soldier against her will? God thinks so. If you do not, why? God said its ok in a time of war.
---God proves Himself historically and by means of the Jewish peoples. To show His awesome and great power He vowed that Jews would always be a part of this world and the only remaining race that was from the beginning to the end.---
How convenient that the God of the Jews decided the Jews were his favorite people...
---In conclusion, I must admit you have a greater knowledge in science than I. Most of the scientific points you made I could not begin to understand. It takes years for scientists to learn these things and I sure do not have years to study them all. Once again I am truly sorry for bringing in the creationists theories and admit that I was led in the wrong direction.---
There is hope...
---Even God said "even the elect will be decieved." And so I was. But there still is inconclusive evidence involved and many questions to be answered by evolutionists. Science is fallible but God is not. As science continues to develop new measures, I am positive God will be proven again. See, how he offers new hope and patience. If the Bible is not enough evidence for you He will give you a way of belief by means of science eventually. If you then choose not to believe then that's between you and Him. Have a nice day Fate. God bless you......I hope you dont find offense to that. :)
Not at all. If science ever does one day prove God exists then that will be fine. It sure would explain a lot, but I would then wonder why He would create the universe just to put us on this tiny blue planet. Do you have any idea how small this planet is when compared with the universe? There are parts of the universe we can never see, can never get to no matter how fast a space ship we have. You are smaller than an atom in a galaxy when compared to the universe. Maybe you think God cares for even the smallest things, but I wonder why he bothered making the rest of it and why he keeps changing the rules (Garden of Eden, then no garden, the the Hebrew God of wrath, now the loving God of Christ). Maybe we are not evolving but God is?
April 2, 2007 2:30 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Ms Mary Treherne,
I am glad you are seeking some spiritual growth. I looked on that site you put as a reference. One thing I can say I agree with is that religion itself has been twisted and turned over the last two centuries and that man has created it into something God did not intend. But to focus on your spirituality would be of great importance. The Bible teaches us to trust in God and not man. Religion is man-made therefore has its faults, hence all of the denominations. That is why God offers up a personal relationship with Him so as to not fall into the trap of man. Keep in mind that this new teaching contains passages from the Apocrypha and Pseudopigrapha which are documents that have been historically proven inaccurate and inconsisten with the original teachings of the Bible. It was the Roman Catholic Church that allowed such teachings until the Lutheran Reformation. Also to keep in mind that this new teaching basis their theories on Bible accounts so do not be misled by their misinterpretations. So many people over time have been misled due to false interpretations which God spoke of would happen. And finally, "challenge everything" as directed by God in the book of James. Good luck on your spiritual quest but be careful as God warned us. Colossians 2:8 Be careful not to allow anyone to captivate you through an empty, deceitful philosophy that is according to human traditions and the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
April 2, 2007 2:20 PM | Report Offensive Comment
If bringing down false religion has anything to do with the end of the 'world' then that 'process' may have already started. A new proof of God for faith, contained within a new ethical teaching for marriage is on the web and if this demonstrates itself to be authentic, then the whole of 'christian' history is looking into the abyss! My husband and I have just started to test the teaching. The stakes appear just too high to ignore. The teaching is a free download at plenty of sites. Here is one of them. www.energon.uklinux.net
April 2, 2007 1:28 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
Since I did tell you that "I am no scientist," my facts have been based on little research. I definately am no historian neither but I am quite more knowledgeable in proving the Bible in an historical sense.
First though I would like to point out some things I found out last night during my research of the subject. I tried to find the website of a published article in what I think was called the Journal of American Sciences??? But not too sure. But if you would like, research Dr. Mary Schweitzer. She recently found soft tissue in a T-rex bone which contained hemoglobin. She is using a new form of paleantology called molecular paleantology that no one bothered to use before due to the fact that evolution was already considered valid. Now with new research indicating that dinosaurs may well have lived in quite a significant later time, evolutionists are starting to worry all their hard work will be out the door. I will admit it is fairly new evidence that is open to scrutiny.
Now about creationist. I have found out that most creationist DO purport lies. I will definately admit my mistakes but as I said I am fairly new to the research in science development. I do believe God has shown me the right path in realizing that these people have taken scientific evidence and perverted it. Same as the roman catholic church perverting the Word of God. But the idea of creatinism is still a valid scientific point in that evolution really has no definitive answer. How can something be proven without being able to repeat it? All other means of science use this method to prove their findings except evolutionism. How can one recreate the earth and all living things except God? And once again what created all those particles that became people? And where did they come from? Admitting to not being able to answer those questions has left serious doubt in the minds of many scientists. But evolutionists goal is to prove there is not God and we can sustain life without Him. The problem with that is that without God we begin to feel like we can be God. So, in conclusion to this statement I must admit that I was at fault for pointing out that creationist are valid scientists. You are right in that they have a pre-bias commitment to their false findings. But, evolutionists have a few questions that need to be answered for their theories to be correct too. Do not think that science is infallible? Because it isn't. You asked whether I go to a doctor or church when I get sick. Of course a doctor! God gave us science to help us. But, let me give you an example of science gone wrong, personally. My wife came across a condition known as Guillen Barre Syndrome. An auto immune system disorder that affects the nervous system. She was told it would be 6 months to a year to walk again and that it would require her to be in the hospital until she was able to walk. 8 weeks later she was discharged with a full recovery. They brought in specialists from around the bay area (thats where we live) and they all could not figure out how that could be possible. But through prayer, and faith my wife beat science. This experience acknowledges further Gods existence...at least to me. You cannot count on chance as a means of diagnoses and scientific proof. The backbone of evolution is "by chance." Keep in mind that not everything can be scientifically proven. Can you prove you went to work last week scientifically? No but you can show a timecard and have witnesses to prove you were there. Legal historical facts. That is how the Bible is proven. Now God has given us freewill to believe or not to believe in His teachings. You choose not to believe even though His Word has been historically proven. But as an intelligent human being you must admit in the historical accuricies of the Bible. And once again I will refer to prophecy and how that is historically accurate with minute details involved.
By the way, quit with accusing God of rape! Please quote some scripture so I could have some verification of that. I have already discussed reasoning behind the so called "genocide" performed by God. Let me point out to you that God's intentions were to have a creation living peacefully and in harmony with God. But it was man that created sin and sin brings judgement. You may not want to believe in the "God of wrath" but never the less that is whatit is and if you really studied the Bible you can see God's long term plan and understand why those things must have taken place. God proves Himself historically and by means of the Jewish peoples. To show His awesome and great power He vowed that Jews would always be a part of this world and the only remaining race that was from the beginning to the end.
In conclusion, I must admit you have a greater knowledge in science than I. Most of the scientific points you made I could not begin to understand. It takes years for scientists to learn these things and I sure do not have years to study them all. Once again I am truly sorry for bringing in the creationists theories and admit that I was led in the wrong direction. Even God said "even the elect will be decieved." And so I was. But there still is inconclusive evidence involved and many questions to be answered by evolutionists. Science is fallible but God is not. As science continues to develop new measures, I am positive God will be proven again. See, how he offers new hope and patience. If the Bible is not enough evidence for you He will give you a way of belief by means of science eventually. If you then choose not to believe then that's between you and Him. Have a nice day Fate. God bless you......I hope you dont find offense to that. :)
April 2, 2007 1:07 PM | Report Offensive Comment
victoria wrote:
---our own mortality is a very frightening topic and it takes great courage to face that question---
Speak for yourself victoria.
---all the intelletualization in the world wont push it away as we all face it at some point.---
Faced it. I'm a cancer survivor. Death is natural. Consider nothng alive in 1850 is alive today. Nothing, not animal, plant or person. Its not that hard to accept death will happen, and probably before we expect it. Jesus had one thing right though, ashes to ashes, dust to dust, not dust to heaven or dust to hell.
April 2, 2007 12:38 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---Since it is YOUR belief that creationist scientists are not a valid means of science there is no point in the debate anymore.---
It is not a belief. It is based on what they write, how creationists lie, bend the laws of physics and introduce tiny inconsistencies to "prove" an area of science, say radioactive dating, as totally invalid. When they ignore the mountain of valid evidence in favor of a tiny inconsistency, that is tatamount to lying when it is presented as overwhelming evidence. They are liars David. If you cannot see a lie and then question the motives of the liar I can not help you. To accept a lie means you will be living life based on lies. Not a good way for anyone to live.
---There are way too many gaps and inconclusions with evolutionism as there are with creationists science too.---
Not on the evolutionary side. Who ever told you that lied. Isn't that a sin?
---Both parties have admittedly came to an inconclusive end to the subject.---
People who study evolution would not say that. Where do you get this idea that evolution scientists have admitted their research has come to an inconclusive end? Where David? Evolutionary studies right now are mainly involving the study of human DNA sequencing which is adding to the already mountain of evidence for evolution and it supports it.
---Why else do you think it is called "The Great Debate."---
It was the "Great Debate" back in the 1920s during the Scopes trial. Its 2007 David, lots of new and supportive research has been done in those 80 years. DNA was not even known then nor during Darwin's time. No scientist today calls evolution a debate. Its a fact. The methods of how evolution operates is continually studied, but like gravity, which I assume you consider a fact, the method for how it happens is a research topic. No one today knows how gravity works David. Do you doubt gravity exists because of that? What do the creationists say about gravity? Do they research it? I would imagine not since it is not necessary to spread doubt about scientific research inconsistent with the bible.
---If creationists were considered non-valid in the science community there wouldnt be a "Great Debate." And obviously with a debate labeled such as that, neither side will come to an agreement.---
You don't seem to understand how science works. Its not debating teams trying to give the best argument. Its science, running repeatable experiments, moving ideas to hypotheses to theories to dogma. Creationists go right from the bible to dogma. They do not do science. They are ignored in the scientific community as are snake oil salesmen and those with perpetual motion machines.
---The question for all evolutionists is how can you deny ID?---
Because the scientific evidence does not support it.
---Great.... big bang theory....but what (or should I say who) made the particles and neutrons and other cool science stuff to create such an elaborate theory?
Science does not know... Science does not invent Gods when it has a question, as christians did to explain how the sun stayed bright for so long. Before nuclear fusion was discovered the christian church used the sun as proof of God's existence since science could not explain the sun. Now we can. So now its the creation of the universe. Pointing to questions as proof of God is a pretty poor method of proof. But I do find it interesting that creationists accept the scientific findings of a big bang, yet say that the light we see today canot come from anywhere more than 6000 light years away, the age the bible says the universe is. So creationists accept the big bang but cannot accept the evidence for the big bang. Doesn't it make you wonder how creationists can agree on a scientific finding when they disagree with its evidence? Maybe the finding is more important than the evidence? Maybe they lie? They are human after all. Sinners every one of them.
---That's what evolution is...just a theory, never to be proven ever, even by means of science.---
Evolution is a fact. How evolution occurs is a theory, just as gravity is a fact but how its works is a theory, just as quantum mechanics is a fact but how it works is a theory. The observable and corroborated evidence is overwhelming.
---Again I ask you, why even ask me about the God of the Bible if you will not take note in the extent of His mercy. God's actions were justified in all that He has done in history even if your mind cannot comprehend it being a justifiable act. And rape?? I sure do not recall rape as part of God's plan. And yes God destroyed civilizations, men women and children.---
Read about God's "mercy" from the only source you seem willing to accept:
Judges 21:10-24
Numbers 31:7-18
Deuteronomy 20:10-14
Deuteronomy 21:10-14
Deuteronomy 22:28-29
Deuteronomy 22:23-24
2 Samuel 12:11-14
Judges 5:30
Exodus 21:7-11
Zechariah 14:1-2
And while you're reading about the slaughter of women and children at God command, don't forget the fetuses in expecting mothers, something today christians call murder.
---And upon His return He will do the same.---
Oh joy. The God of love returning to kill, rape, and enslave men women and children.
---To justify His acts in the OT, most likely the destruction of civilizations were to destroy bloodlines for a particular civilization. In part due to the sustanation of the Jewish people. Can you name any other race in the history of the world that is still around besides Jews?---
David, I implore you to read your own words. You have just justified genocide. This is the type of evil I see creeping out of religion. How religion can be used to justify the unjustifiable. bin Laden reads his Quran the same way.
---Jews are God's chosen people and are the most scattered race of people in the world. Jews are on every continent and pretty much every country.---
So are the Irish, Indians, Chinese, west Africans and Philipinos.
---Have you ever seen a mexican in poland? Not very probable. But as it was written in the Bible in the OT, the Jews will be the one remaining race from the beginning of the world until its end. Even through the holocaust Jews still thrive and always will. So because of certain civilizations disobeying God and the fact that Jews have to be the last remaining race, God is once again proving Himself real.---
Genocide proves God is real? I think I'm about to get sick...
---The science aspect of things; we can debate that for years and we can write long respone after long response with no end in sight so I'm gonna be the one to say let's leave it alone.---
You recognize that you're mind is closed?
---Trust me I am open minded to the subject.---
I see little evidence of that. You only provide "evidence" from one single source, a source Hermit notes says that the bible comes first, then the science to support it where it can find it. That's not science. Would you go to a doctor trained in creation science?
---Even if you could prove without a doubt that God is not real I still would have faith, but then that would be blind faith, with which I do not have right now.---
Its as blind as blind can be. There is no evidence supporting God's existence nor proof he does not exist. Theologians recognize that. That's why they call it faith. Faith is a belief something exists without evidence. You seem to think there is factual evidence. I suggest you go to someone who studies the bible, an academic, and ask them where the "facts" are. You might be surprised.
---One more thing concerining prophecy. Nostadamus predicted many things that did not come true which you should know.---
Yet...
---But ALL of God's prophecies have come true (except of course end times prophecies) What seperates God from some psychic off the street is that God's "predictions" so you call them, have never faultered. What are the chances of hundreds of prophecies not faultering? I think I would rather keep my faith in that than an evolutionist theory that has no significant evidence.---
Sorry to hear that David. You are following people who do not understand science, use subterfuge and lies to make you believe science is wrong when that same science made the fantastic medical leaps you will gladly use in the future. Next time you have a disease try praying yourself a cure, or go to the creationists and tell them you are not going to the hospital because those doctors use science. Have a great life David imagining yourself in heaven. Just please don't break any laws in the name of God nor do any harm to anyone as you may one day think your God commands of you, as you point out God commanded the OT Hebrews to do, as bin Laden thinks God command of him today.
April 2, 2007 10:45 AM | Report Offensive Comment
our own mortality is a very frightening topic and it takes great courage to face that question-
all the intelletualization in the world wont push it away as we all face it at some point.
April 2, 2007 12:36 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
Hi Fate, hope your doing good. Nice response. I am so happy to have found such an intelligent person to debate these issues. Since it is YOUR belief that creationist scientists are not a valid means of science there is no point in the debate anymore. There are way too many gaps and inconclusions with evolutionism as there are with creationists science too. Both parties have admitedly came to an inconclusive end to the subject. Why else do you think it is called "The Great Debate." If creationists were considered non-valid in the science community there wouldnt be a "Great Debate." And obviously with a debate labeled such as that, neither side will come to an agreement. The question for all evolutionists is how can you deny ID? Great.... big bang theory....but what (or should I say who) made the particles and neutrons and other cool science stuff to create such an elaborate theory? That's what evolution is...just a theory, never to be proven ever, even by means of science.
Again I ask you, why even ask me about the God of the Bible if you will not take note in the extent of His mercy. God's actions were justified in all that He has done in history even if your mind cannot comprehend it being a justifiable act. And rape?? I sure do not recall rape as part of God's plan. And yes God destroyed civilizations, men women and children. And upon His return He will do the same. To justify His acts in the OT, most likely the destruction of civilizations were to destroy bloodlines for a particular civilization. In part due to the sustanation of the Jewish people. Can you name any other race in the history of the world that is still around besides Jews? Jews are God's chosen people and are the most scattered race of people in the world. Jews are on every continent and pretty much every country. Have you ever seen a mexican in poland? Not very probable. But as it was written in the Bible in the OT, the Jews will be the one remaining race from the beginning of the world until its end. Even through the holocaust Jews still thrive and always will. So because of certain civilizations disobeying God and the fact that Jews have to be the last remaining race, God is once again proving Himself real. The science aspect of things; we can debate that for years and we can write long respone after long response with no end in sight so I'm gonna be the one to say let's leave it alone. Trust me I am open minded to the subject. Even if you could prove without a doubt that God is not real I still would have faith, but then that would be blind faith, with which I do not have right now. One more thing concerining prophecy. Nostadamus predicted many things that did not come true which you should know. But ALL of God's prophecies have come true (except of course end times prophecies) What seperates God from some psychic off the street is that God's "predictions" so you call them, have never faultered. What are the chances of hundreds of prophecies not faultering? I think I would rather keep my faith in that than an evolutionist theory that has no significant evidence.
April 2, 2007 12:01 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Apologies for the length...
David wrote:
---New rule: no more personal attacks. If we are to have an intelligent debate we must respect one another on a personal level. Sounds good?---
As long as you consider the bible possibly imperfect. Otherwise nothing will change your mind, the definition of a closed mind. Is your mind open?
---If you must accept evolutionism you must accept creationism.---
No I don't. The first is scientifically researched and peer reviewed. The second is made up based on a pre existing bias. The two cannot be compared. The first publishes to peer reviewed journals for other scientists to review, the second publishes in its own magazine. Its like comparing the journal Nature with People magazine.
---Both means use science as a way to determine the outcome.---
Name one peer reviewed journal creationist bunk ever was submitted to. Do you ever see creationist bunk in Nature, Science, and the hundreds of other journals out there real scientists must present their research to in order for their research to be called science, for other researchers to review for correctness, absense of bias and proper methods to rule out mistakes?
---To use the statement "creationism is bunk" would constitute for a lack of open mindedness in the scientific debate since both parties use science to determine their findings.---
No. My open mindness allows me to evaluate the "science" creationists write and I have read it and determined it is bunk. Creationists make statements or even give what you feel is a true scientific result without it being peer reviewed or being repeated experimentally. When someone tries to sell you medicine that has not been scientifically tested you would call it snake oil. Well, creationism is nothing more than snake oil. If creationism had any real factual backing they could get it into a peer reviewed journal. You might think that since it doesn't agree with the scientific dogma it would be rejected, yet there are thousands of examples of scientific results that broke with the scientific dogma that made it into peer reviewed juornals. Peer reviewers do not check that the data and results agree with dogma, they check that it was done using valid scientific methods. Creationists fail to get anything published because they do not use valid scientific methods.
---Heres where I found my evidence. Copy and paste in your web browser.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i1/howold.asp
---
Thanks for the reference. First let me take you to the bottom of the article you referenced to note that all but two references for the information they posted came from some publication called "Creation". Any high schooler would have been challenged by a teacher for obtaining so much information from one source. Take a look at the references of a real scientific publication and see the difference:
http://www.research.ibm.com/antivirus/SciPapers/Kephart/ALIFE3/alife3.html
Paste this into your browser and go down to the references and compare them with references that papers at you website give. If the only reference you need is the bible or your own magazine, that is fine, just do not call it science.
Let me focus on just one claim in your link:
"Argonne National Laboratories have shown that heating wood (lignin, its major component), water and acidic clay at 150°C (rather cool geologically) for 4 to 36 weeks, in a sealed quartz tube with no added pressure, forms high-grade black coal."
Their point is that making coal does not take millions of years. I agree. But so what? They do not go on to say that these conditions existed in all the coal formations on earth do they? No, they just leave this little bit of information there and let you fill in the result they hope you take away. Do you think the earth's billions of cubic miles of coal deposits on all continents contained quartz tubes that heated wood fell into with water and acidic clay? Do they propose this as an explanation for the world's coal deposits? Do they propose this to the scientific world as an explanation for how coal formed on earth. The answer to all of those question is no, because they are not interested in making this claim to scientists who know it is wrong. They make it to those who have no scientific background, who have no idea how science determines truth. People will happily accept the result they imply because it agrees with their predetermined ideas. That's what snake oil salesmen did selling snake oil to people who had ailments science could not treat. And many people bought snake oil and many people buy creationism, but that does not make either scientific.
---I definitely am no scientist but from the research that I have obtained, both sides come to an inconclusive means of proving the age of the earth due to the scientific means of determination not being 100% accurate.---
100% accuracy never exists. Take a tape measure and measure you height. Lets say you are exactly 5' 9.18756" tall. You will probably say you are 5' 9" tall, but that is not 100% accurate. But you are certainly close. So is scientific dating of the earth. You see, if it were just one measurement using one type of measurement I'd agree with you, but its so much more. Measurements of sea floor spreading, measurement of multitudes of radioactive element dating including carbon, argon, helium , iodine-xenon, anthanum-barium, lead, lutetium-hafnium, neon, potassium-argon, rhenium-osmium, ubidium-strontium, samarium-neodymium, uranium-lead, uranium-lead-helium, uranium-thorium, and uranium-uranium. What you need to understand is that science is not one scientist making a discovery and every other scientist accepts it. Far from it, few accept it, especially if it is something new. But either way, the experiment needs to be repeated, the methods studied for error. You may not have heard about cold fusion. It was an "experiment" that some real scientists made back in the 1980s. They said they had made fusion happen at room temperature. Scientists know that when atoms fuse they give off neutrons, which will kill you if you're not shielded, which the experimenters did not mention. Many scientists asked why these scientists were still alive or neutrons were not given off, an impossibility determine from other experiments of fusion. Others tried to repeat the experiment and could not. The guys who proclaimed they had done this said everyone was doing it wrong but no one could repeat it. Most people accept that the scientists were not lying but had high hopes and were heavily biased that they created fusion, and that bias creeps into the data. All scientists know this can happen to any scientist. Its over 20 years later and still no cold fusion. Science is very demanding. You might get a fraud or mistake past scientists now and then, but its very hard and is usually caught. Science requires validation. That's why creationists do not publish in scientific journalists. Just in their own magazines believers read and have their biases reinforced. Science works to remove bias, creationism requires bias. Its a night and day difference.
---You have asked me why my God, the God of the Bible, does certain things and has a particular personality. I have given you Bible quotes (which you do not accept) to show you why my God has done these things. You wanted to know and I gave you my answer. What other answer could I give you? You want to believe that God sent Hebrews to kill whole cities but then when I give you evidence of His mercy and patience, I'm using Bible quotes which are irrelevant? How can you believe the parts of the Bible you want but when I show you a good side to God you will not accept them? So if you want to know why the God of the Bible does certain things IN THE BIBLE, you need to accept certain scriptures that support that claim.---
Look, I have read the bible, many times. I understand God's good side. What I'm trying to point out to you is that He has a side you would consider ugly if a human did the things He is said to have done in the bible, or asked man to do for him. I'm only asking that you read it all and accept the fact that God has a very ugly side, a side that supports slavery, murder, killing of children, genocide and rape. I think you said earlier that if you accept parts of the bible you must accept them all. I agree. I think we both agree people who accept some parts should accept all parts if they accept the bible is the word of God. I am asking you whether you support God's bad side, his support of slavery, genocide, child murder and rape?
---Now I hope that we could debate issues one at a time. I'm usually at work so my responses cant be too long. To me the scientific issue has passed. I know we could not come to a conclusive answer on the age of the world which is why I refer to the chronology of the Bible as a means of aging, since evolutionists cannot without a doubt prove themselves. So please let's move on.---
You are wrong, so wrong. Creationists start with the age the bible says and work backward. Scientists start with the question and work forward. If you had a cancer and your doctor KNEW that prayer would cure it because God can cure anything, and then worked backward from that to develop a treatment, would you use it, or would you use a treatment that science developed by first starting with the question of how to cure this cancer and using the scientific method, test, develop treatments and measure their effectiveness? Again, do you go to the doctor or a minister for medical treatment? That is a question you have never answered.
---Just wondering if you have researched about King Cyrus and the prophecy I gave you. If you wnat more proof of God research the city of Sidon, Tyre, Gaza and Ashkelon, Sodom and Gomorrah. Prophecies concerning these age old cities were written 100's if not 1000's of years before their occurance. This is the best way of me proving to you that God is real. Not one prophecy in the Bible was not accurate and accurate to the minute details that they gave. So, hear from ya later Fate. I guess the debate is still on. Take care.---
Should I pray to Naustadamus? His prophacies have come true as well, many say. Some of Mohammeds too. What do you say to prophesies that come true in other religions? Are you ready to jump ship and follow the other religion? You see, if science determined it were wrong, for example, that Newton's laws of motion were not accurate, they would scrutinize the new evidence and develop new theories if the evidence was valid. That's what happened when Einstein showed Newton's equations of motion were indeed wrong, well not so wrong as not very accurate. Newton assumed time was constant. It is not as Einstein "proved". He "proved" it using the scientific method. He wrote down his observations and mathematical formulas and put them out for all to review in a journal. Others reviewed his work. Some disagreed but they repeated his experiments and showed he was right. Newton's laws became a thing of the past but are still used today for very local measurements, but not things like traveling to the moon. If Newtons laws were used to go to the moon the Apollo astronauts would have died in space.
Is any of this is beginning to convince you something is amiss when creationists call their articles science? If they mislead you with the earth's age, where else are they misleading you, and more importantly, why.
Someone else who published here on On Faith told me that false faith, faith in God based on lies, was better than no faith. This person also pointed to creationist articles. I was amazed that misleading people to get them to believe in God was a goal of anyone who called themselves a christian. So I know there are christians out there trying to save your soul at any cost. That is the bunk you are reading. God gave you a good brain with an ability to analyze. You've said you have no training, that's fine, just ask good questions. My generation said to never to trust anyone over 30, not because they were all liars, but because some of them were. Creationists have proven that some of them are liars. Don't trust them. Trust no one. Think for yourself and question what you hear. I guarantee a creationist will just stare at you if you asked them what other scientists peer reviewed their work.
April 1, 2007 11:02 PM | Report Offensive Comment
by the way, David, your Mt. St. Helen's argument is refuted by actual geologists here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mtsthelens.html
and here:
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/mt_st_helens_dacite_kh.htm
April 1, 2007 10:42 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David says:
"If you must accept evolutionism you must accept creationism. Both means use science as a way to determine the outcome."
Unfortunately, this is not true. david gives us a link to "Answers in Genesis" to support his argument, but look at what they have to say on the matter:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/about/faith.asp
"The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ."
and later:
"No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."
David, a truly scientific approach to knowledge would apply the same rigorous standards of evidence to Biblical claims as to any scientific hypothesis. The fact that Creationists demand an a priori acceptance of Biblical claims as not only true but as the final arbiter of truth without question males any claim they have to a scientific approach untrue. Science recognizes no such unquestionable authority.
Regards
A Hermit
April 1, 2007 10:27 PM | Report Offensive Comment
These forums represent one of the major problems of the world in microcosm. The near-total lack of respectful dialogue is disheartening. Whether we're staunch beleivers or Dawkins devotees, we all should have a bit more humility than to spout off indignantly about things for which there truly are no definite answers.
Everybody's so defensive... It seems to me each side percieves itself as being under attack. I think the majority of people occupy a middle ground that is open to science and religion and a diversity of beliefs and rejects extremism at either end of the spectrum (although that statistic about 40% of Americans rejecting evolution is unnerving, I would argue it represents a failure of education on both sides of the debate). Normal people, it seems, just don't make good headlines.
It's kind of absurd to categorically reject evolutionary theory, given the mountains of evidence supporting it, but the sheer number of people for whom faith is a positive, life-enriching force (and not an impulse to violence) makes me hesitant to just dismiss it.
Religion is not the problem. Atheism is not the problem. Human beings on both sides and their eternal lack of respect and humility are the problem. If we're all so averse to religious war, why do we keep fanning the flames?
April 1, 2007 4:32 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
Hello again.
New rule: no more personal attacks. If we are to have an intelligent debate we must respect one another on a personal level. Sounds good?
Ok the issue with science and aging the world. If you must accept evolutionism you must accept creationism. Both means use science as a way to determine the outcome. To use the statement "creationism is bunk" would constitute for a lack of open mindedness in the scientific debate since both parties use science to determine their findings. Heres where I found my evidence. Copy and paste in your web browser.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i1/howold.asp
I definately am no scientist but from the research that I have obtained, both sides come to an inconclusive means of proving the age of the earth due to the scientific means of determination not being 100% accurate.
You have asked me why my God, the God of the Bible, does certain things and has a particular personality. I have given you Bible quotes (which you do not accept) to show you why my God has done these things. You wanted to know and I gave you my answer. What other answer could I give you? You want to believe that God sent Hebrews to kill whole cities but then when I give you evidence of His mercy and patience, I'm using Bible quotes which are irrelevant? How can you believe the parts of the Bible you want but when I show you a good side to God you will not accept them? So if you want to know why the God of the Bible does certain things IN THE BIBLE, you need to accept certain scriptures that support that claim.
Now I hope that we could debate issues one at a time. I'm usually at work so my responses cant be too long. To me the scientific issue has passed. I know we could not come to a conclusive answer on the age of the world which is why I refer to the chronology of the Bible as a means of aging, since evolutionists cannot without a doubt prove themselves. So please let's move on.
Just wondering if you have researched about King Cyrus and the prophecy I gave you. If you wnat more proof of God research the city of Sidon, Tyre, Gaza and Ashkelon, Sodom and Gomorrah. Prophecies concerning these age old cities were written 100's if not 1000's of years before their occurance. This is the best way of me proving to you that God is real. Not one prophecy in the Bible was not accurate and accurate to the minute details that they gave. So, hear from ya later Fate. I guess the debate is still on. Take care.
April 1, 2007 2:31 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---Ok so every proof I bring you gets thrown out like I am just accepting what some dummy had to say. So be it.
I have re-read your postings below and have yet to see a proof. You make a lot of references to the bible, which I do not accept as proof. You also made some claims (dinosaur blood, moon's orbit increasing). I asked for references so I could read about these "proofs" but you gave none.
---I guess having a logical debate with someone so hard headed as yourself is not logical.---
Now who is getting personal?
---I gave it a shot though. Ive come through with answers to your every question but all you hear is yourself.---
Read my posts below. I asked about the big bang light. No response. I've asked about God's apparent ability to require Hebrews to kill whole city populations and even specify killing the children. You say he is a God of judgement but do not explain why your God would want children killed. I've asked you where you would go when injured, the house of God or the house of science. I have a lot of questions, see them below. You answers are biblical quotes and creationist bunk.
---I know now no matter what I say or what proof I have that you will not hear. That's fine. I made my points.---
If that is all you wanted to do then you have accomplished it. But you have not done what you say you have done, answer my questions.
---I hope you can find fullfillment in your life not knowing about the true God.---
You have no idea how fulfilling living in reality can be.
---But just so you know too, geology is science. Thats just pretty basic info for ya.---
I guess you are refering to the billions of years it takes to go from particles to people. Well, guess what, that's how long it took according to science, about 3.5 - 4.0 billion years. Maybe there is something to science eh?
---I had fun debating but then you got too personal. Two words: ANGER MANAGEMENT! Later homie. Take care.---
I'm not angry. You have no idea how much fun I'm having! Did I get personal? Sorry if I did. I really would like to hear how layering of sediments can be evenly layered on valley floors and slopes as creationists say it can and how it explains sedimentary rock where the layers are not horizontal but at angles or rolling like the one I asked you about. You see, I have asked others these questions and have looked into many claims of creationists and have found there is a lot of work by creationists to confuse the science, to actually lie about certain things like sedimentary layering. Its easy to tell someone not familiar with scientific methods and findings that its all wrong. Most people do not have the training to determine whether creationists are right or whether science is right. So I don't blame people for falling for creationist bunk. I blame the creationists for consciously misleading people using people's faith to get people to accept their bunk all in the name of defending the faith against reality. Consider this; if nothing could naturally organize itself into a self contained entity as life did, then tornadoes and hurricanes could not form, yet they do, every day.
April 1, 2007 12:00 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate...forgot to clear up a couple of things...
you said,
Sort of like the early christians ripped off judaism? Do you feel other christian churches ripped of the catholics who maintained christianity, developed it through the council of Nicea until the protestant reformation hundreds of years later? Please tell me what you think is the true christian church. I'll bet its the one's your parents belonged to.
Christianity is a runoff of Judaism. You cant have Christianity without Christ right? If it werent for pre-Christ Judaism Christianity wouldnt be born. And catholics did not maintain christianity, christianity maintained itself. The council of Nicea was a determination of the canons with which the catholic church added their own canons including the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.
you said,
Prove? I thought faith meant something could not be proved? I thought belief in God was not based on proofs but on acceptance. So you have proof? Bring it forward, please. You would be the first. If anyone told you there was proof of God's existence, they lied to you.
I think you got religions mixed up because the Christian God wants us to try to prove Him wrong. Too many people think you have to have "blind faith". Not so. That is what prophecies are for. To prove God is real. You want an example? Here..
The prohet Isaiah writing about 700 b.c names cyrus the king who will say to Jerusalem that it shall be built and that the Temple foundation shall be laid (Isaiah 44:28;54:1)100 years later the Temple was destroyed by King Nebuchadnezzar. After Jerusalem was taken by the Babylonians, it was conquered by the Persians in about 539 b.c. Shortly after that a persian king named Cyrus gave to the decree to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. Research that Fate and you will find it to be true. So a prophecy by Isaiah 100 years befor Cyrus was even born. Prophecies like these are what God wants us to use to prove Himself. But Im sure you will find a way to not believe that too even though it has been proven historically.
And I guess you just missed the part about the sediment rock and how that has been dismissed as an accurate source for aging the earth. I read your response and the fact of earthly catastrophes is an easy explanation for your valley theory.
And on a personal level; no, I would never give money to Israel to hope for Armageddon to get here quicker. Whoever does that is just crazy. And no I wouldnt go kill someone because they did something against God. God can handle his own battles. Jesus declared a new commandment that we should love one another as we love ourselves. You also mentioned why God couldnt destroy cities on His own and had to use the Hebrews. Think about that......Sodom and Gomorrah???
Well, its been nice but I have to leave it at that. Im not a crazy Christian that you see on TV sending money to Israel hoping for a quicker Judgement Day. God will do that on His own. I just live my life in a manner consistent with Gods will and must defend His name. Im not led with blind faith as you may think because I once too questioned God over and over again until I found truth in His ways and truth in His prophetical accuricies. I hope you can find that too Fate. Ill pray for you. And no matter how much you might hate me because of my views I will keep you in prayer. I know you dont believe in that, but for me to do that act should be a sign of respect and love for you as a human. Take care.
March 31, 2007 11:39 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate, again........
Ok so every proof I bring you gets thrown out like I am just accepting what some dummy had to say. So be it. I guess having a logical debate with someone so hard headed as yourself is not logical. I gave it a shot though. Ive come through with answers to your every question but all you hear is yourself. I know now no matter what I say or what proof I have that you will not hear. That's fine. I made my points. I hope you can find fullfillment in your life not knowing about the true God. But just so you know too, geology is science. Thats just pretty basic info for ya. I had fun debating but then you got too personal. Two words: ANGER MANAGEMENT! Later homie. Take care.
March 31, 2007 10:55 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---First off, there are two forms of earth aging sciences. Evolutionists and Creationist. Neither one has come to a specific conclusion and as a matter of fact the evolutionists theories are starting to become more and more discredited as time goes on. Yes, I will give examples because you shouldnt take my word for it.---
Creation science is bunk. And "earth aging science" is not evolution. Its geology.
---First, evolutionist think the world is some 14 billion years old only due to their belief in "particles-to-people" theory.---
Hahahaha. Your ignorance is evident. Scientists do not "believe" anything. That is your first assumption that is causing you to accept creationist bunk.
---For us as humans it would take billions of years to evolve from particles to people.---
And you know this because...?
---Scientific methods for aging have been based upon thicknesses of sedimentary rocks. This method of aging has been proven inaccurate as recent tests have shown that sedimentary rock can build up faster than previously thought. For example:The Mount St. Helens eruption in Washington state produced 25 feet (7.6 meters) of finely layered sediment in a single afternoon. Any catastrophes occuring during the history of the world would throw off the method of rock sedimentation for use as an aging tool. Earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruption, etc. Here are a couple more examples to show how evolutionists scientific methods have came crashing in on them.---
Do rocks layer in all directions? In other words, if you had a valley and something like Mt St. Helens sent mud and sediment into it, would the layers be horizontal or layer the sides of the hills equally? Would I find, say, a foot of sediment on the sides of the valley AND on the floor of the valley? Look here to see an example of this: http://www.dnr.state.md.us/publiclands/western/sidelinghill.html. Science says the sediment was layered horizontally and then pushed into the form of a valley and hills over millions of years. Creationists say the layers formed inside a valley that was filled with sediment equally on the bottom and sides, then erosion made the hill. Somehow sediment was layered equally on the sides and bottom of the previously existing valley. That's physically impossible so I ask you, why does creation science say something that is physically impossible?
---Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years—certainly not the 65 million years from when evolutionists think the last dinosaur lived.---
Got a reference for that? And if it were true why do you think it couldn;t last more than a few thousand years? You are making a lot of assumptions, or should I say, accepting a lot of bunk.
---The moon is slowly receding from earth at about 1-1/2 inches (4cm) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance. This gives a maximum possible age of the moon—not the actual age. This is far too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks).---
Got a reference for that?
---Just a few examples of how you cant depend on science for all your answers.---
And when you break you leg or have a disease where do you go to be healed? To church, a house of God, or a hospital, a house of science?
---Creationists(believers in the Bible) agree that they cannot scientifically prove the world is less than 10,000 years old, but either can evolutionists. All creationists can prove is that the methods evolutionists use are not accurate and not even close. Creationists ultimately date the earth using the chronology of the Bible. This is because they believe that this is an accurate eyewitness account of world history, which can be shown to be consistent with much data.---
Eye witness? Who was the eye wit... , oh, I guess you mean God. When you have a guy with superpowers on your side its sorta hard to argue with you. Let me ask you this: Do you believe the scientific evidence for a big bang is real evidence of the creation of the universe (let there be light)? If so how do you explain that the light which proves the big bang is 14 billion years old? If the earth is only 6000 years old we could not see that old light. Did God wave a wand and just do it to confuse us?
Any other questions Fate? Please let me know.
Do you realize that when you say creationists believe in the bible and start with its beliefs as true and work from there that you have just defined what science calls bias and is a reason to not trust experimental results, even results that may be real? Science is more than just getting the correct answer. Its about proving the correct answer. Do you understand the difference?
March 31, 2007 10:02 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---First of all your first problem is that your knowledge is based upon a Roman Catholic Church tradition. I feel like we could not even begin to debate certain issues due to the fact that the Catholic Church is NOT Christianity.---
No? Do you agree with the results of the First Council of Nicaea? That was the Catholic church resolving many issues christianity had up until they resolved them in Nicea. I always found it interesting that in 325AD christianity was in crisis because the message was muddled requiring the council to accept some concepts and toss others to avoid conflicts. A very interesting way to determine a religious doctrine developed three centuries earlier, accepting the writings of only four apostles, while other apostles writings that were in conflict were tossed, never to be read in church again.
---The catholic church is the reason for the perversion of Christianity. Cm'on, who asks a man (pope) for forgiveness. And upon what authority does he have for this kind of act except his own. No where in the Bible does it say that a man can forgive sins. Only God.---
Oh I agree. Though the catholics will tell you that the pope and his priests can forgive sin in the name of God but it will be up to God to actually hand out the forgiveness.
---One thing I find offensive Fate is the fact that you would think I would want to blow up NYC to please God.---
Well no, it was more of a question. There are christians who will kill and in some cases consider anything they think God would want. Some have killed abortion doctors for example. If you believed that God spoke to you and asked you to kill someone, and you really believed it was God speaking, would you do it? A better question would be: Would you give money to Israel so Israel could survive as a nation since Israel is required for prophecies to be realized? I find either one as psychotic as bin Laden killing thousands in God's name. Do you?
---I used that as a metaphor. That is not a real prediction I am trying to make but the equivolent to many prophecies fortold in the Bible several hundred and some several thousand years before they happen! Don't make me out to be the evil one here.---
Predictions in the bible? Hahahahahahaha! Name one. And no twisting now. Does it say for example that a leader of meek intelligence would lie to launch a war in Mesopetamia in 2003 from the other side of the earth?
---Both the God of the OT and the God (Jesus) of the NT proclaim the destruction of the wicked. And both declare their love and EXTREME patience with humanity to repent from their sins.---
Then why not let God do his own dirty work? It seems the Hebrews needed to do it for him. How convenient. Do you know Moses ordered prisoners of a whole town killed, men women and children? He did this AFTER the Hebrew soldiers took pity on them and spared their lives. You see, "God" wanted them to die. The Hebrews of course obeyed Moses' orders (Numbers 31:16-18). My question to you was whether you would also obey God's orders if you believed they came from God, as the Hebrews believed Moses' orders came from God. Here is where you can read a few more examples of God being a nice guy: http://nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible3.htm#kill-man-woman-infant. I'd really like to know whether you would harm innocents in the name of God and if not, why you would disobey God?
---Concerning Islam compared to Christianity:
The two are so close in comparison to the lame of knowledge but their purposes are so far apart. Islam even teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin and will return for a second coming to rule the world for a thousand years. Muhammed basiclly ripped off Christianity but kept and added parts he liked.---
Sort of like the early christians ripped off judaism? Do you feel other christian churches ripped of the catholics who maintained christianity, developed it through the council of Nicea until the protestant reformation hundreds of years later? Please tell me what you think is the true christian church. I'll bet its the one's your parents belonged to.
---There are no known prochecies in the Koran.---
So?
---Prophecy is important to prove that God is real.---
Prove? I thought faith meant something could not be proved? I thought belief in God was not based on proofs but on acceptance. So you have proof? Bring it forward, please. You would be the first. If anyone told you there was proof of God's existence, they lied to you.
---Muhammed had a couple of visions and created his own religion that was followed so closely due to cultural similarities.---
Were his visions from God? Can people have visions that do not come from God? How could you tell one from another? Why do you trust some and not Mohammed's?
---The Islamic god Allah cannot offer love, compassion and mercy like the True Christian God because Muslims seperate God from themselves believing God is too powerful for Him to care about us but rely on the teachings of one Muhammed.---
I'll have to trust you on that one. But so what. Why is your belief true and their's wrong? You have proof one is true and the other wrong? Please share it. You're once again sounding like the result must be a loving God so anything that supports it is correct. In the real world that is called a "heavy bias". What if God wanted people dead? What if humans really were created and lived in the garden of Eden as immortal by a benevolent God, but the your God came along tossed them out and today we face death? I know, its not in the bible, but just consider an evil nasty God, one that has fun torturing us humans. Can't imagine it? Ask yourself why you can't. The Greeks could.
---So once again I brought you proof that is undeniable. Please respond this time with some proof of your own instead of the constant human reasoning.---
Sorry to be using reason. I thought God wanted us to use our reason, but maybe when asking tough questions you don't want to hear them. I asked you a question in my last posting that you have not answered. Is the earth 6000 years old as the bible says? If you believe that is true how do you handle the scientific disagreement
with that while accepting the archeological science you say proves the bible? Please answer this and feel free to use your human reasoning.
And you have brought NO proof that is undeniable. You have brought no proof at all. Just statements that your belief in the bible is the correct one because you say the bible is the word of God and is therefore correct. That's what is called circular logic.
March 31, 2007 9:35 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
I responded to you below once already but didnt have time to respond about the age of this world. Since we are dealing with scientific matters this this might be a long response. Here goes......
First off, there are two forms of earth aging sciences. Evolutionists and Creationist. Neither one has come to a specific conclusion and as a matter of fact the evolutionists theories are starting to become more and more discredited as time goes on. Yes, I will give examples because you shouldnt take my word for it.
First, evolutionist think the world is some 14 billion years old only due to their belief in "particles-to-people" theory. For us as humans it would take billions of years to evolve from particles to people. Scientific methods for aging have been based upon thicknesses of sedimentary rocks. This method of aging has been proven inaccurate as recent tests have shown that sedimentary rock can build up faster than previously thought. For example:The Mount St. Helens eruption in Washington state produced 25 feet (7.6 meters) of finely layered sediment in a single afternoon. Any catastrophes occuring during the history of the world would throw off the method of rock sedimentation for use as an aging tool. Earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruption, etc. Here are a couple more examples to show how evolutionists scientific methods have came crashing in on them.
Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years—certainly not the 65 million years from when evolutionists think the last dinosaur lived.
The moon is slowly receding from earth at about 1-1/2 inches (4cm) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance. This gives a maximum possible age of the moon—not the actual age. This is far too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric ‘dates’ assigned to moon rocks).
Just a few examples of how you cant depend on science for all your answers. Creationists(believers in the Bible) agree that they cannot scientifically prove the world is less than 10,000 years old, but either can evolutionists. All creationists can prove is that the methods evolutionists use are not accurate and not even close. Creationists ultimately date the earth using the chronology of the Bible. This is because they believe that this is an accurate eyewitness account of world history, which can be shown to be consistent with much data.
Any other questions Fate? Please let me know.
March 31, 2007 8:37 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Someday, the world is going to end, if by end we all mean "become unfit for human habitation. The sun, and for that matter the whole universe, are going to run out of energy and darken (over a period of billions of years). Humanity will survive to see one or both of these only with unfathomably good fortune. I believe ABC had a program on this several months ago. They rated nuclear war and environmental change as the biggest threat to our ability to live here. The program included a comment from no less than Stephen Hawking, who publicly advocated searching the universe for potential new homes.
Of the texts generally recognized as "apocalyptic," i've only read one -the Book of Revelation. Some of the things it describes, like dragons and the Beast and various symbolically numbered things seem a bit outside the realm of strictly rational, literal belief, even if they do have symbolic significance for some believers.
What is beleivable is the reference to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. This is clearly a metaphor, but it may well prove accurate. What are four things that can and do kill huge numbers of people? How about war, famine, pestilence and (rather redundantly) death? These are often related to each other, one resulting in the other and vice versa, and if they ever come to a head at one time, humanity could be in big trouble.
The reference to people who "make their robes white in the blood of the Lamb" is rather plausible as well. Would some section of the world not be expected to seek spiritual refuge (of one sort or another) in a more-chaotic-than-ever world?
I'm not implying in any way that you need a Divine revelation to think any of this up (although with some of the more phantasmagoric stuff... I don't know what was going on in the author's brain, to be sure). Rather or not you put any stock in the text as a predictor of coming events, it can still serve as a warning, and a push to look critically at your life. War, famine, pestilence and death threaten every person, all the time. Is the world ending? Yep. Your world and my world are all going to end in a relatively short number of years. We may not all die in a big fiery apocalypse, but we're all going to die, sooner or later. One might view the book of Revelation as an allegory for a single human life - our worlds are always falling apart. It predicts a positive final outcome, out of all the chaos and tragedy we endure, if we live the right way (it does this to the exclusion of non-Christians, a particular point which I, being a Jew, must quibble with).
First post on here, awaiting the hellfire from believers and atheists alike =P
March 31, 2007 5:47 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Grow up please - the world is what we make of it. I'm just scared that these fairy stories will lead some of us to destroy it on the basis of pleasing an invisible friend.
If I had a choice to leave all the religious believers behind on this planet and set up camp somewhere else in the multiverse alongside fellow secular humanists and atheists, I would feel far safer in the knowledge that any cataclysmic event bringing about the end of our species would be simply random bad "luck" or bad planning.
And if God does exist in any form whatsoever, on past performance I gladly reject any authority claimed on its behalf.
March 31, 2007 4:25 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
Thanks for writing back. I'm glad you have some knowledge of the subject except the fact that you continually use your own reasoning as your evidence.
First of all your first problem is that your knowledge is based upon a Roman Catholic Church tradition. I feel like we could not even begin to debate certain issues due to the fact that the Catholic Church is NOT Christianity. The catholic church is the reason for the perversion of Christianity. Cm'on, who asks a man (pope) for forgiveness. And upon what authority does he have for this kind of act except his own. No where in the Bible does it say that a man can forgive sins. Only God.
One thing I find offensive Fate is the fact that you would think I would want to blow up NYC to please God. I used that as a metaphor. That is not a real prediction I am trying to make but the equivolent to many prophecies fortold in the Bible several hundred and some several thousand years before they happen! Don't make me out to be the evil one here.
Concerning the destuction of many civilization by Gods order: Ezekiel 18:23 "Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked...and not rather that he turn from his ways and live?" God is a God of love but also a God of judgement. Even Jesus said in Matthew 10:34 about the purpose of His mission. "Think not that I came to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace but the sword." Both the God of the OT and the God (Jesus) of the NT proclaim the destruction of the wicked. And both declare their love and EXTREME patience with humanity to repent from their sins.
Concerning Islam compared to Christianity:
The two are so close in comparison to the lame of knowledge but their purposes are so far apart. Islam even teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin and will return for a second coming to rule the world for a thousand years. Muhammed basiclly ripped off Christianity but kept and added parts he liked. There are no known prochecies in the Koran. Prophecy is important to prove that God is real. Muhammed had a couple of visions and created his own religion that was followed so closely due to cultural similarities. The Islamic god Allah cannot offer love, compassion and mercy like the True Christian God because Muslims seperate God from themselves believing God is too powerful for Him to care about us but rely on the teachings of one Muhammed.
So once again I brought you proof that is undeniable. Please respond this time with some proof of your own instead of the constant human reasoning.
March 31, 2007 4:06 PM | Report Offensive Comment
no, unfortunately, the world will not end; it's just going to drag on and on and on. -gil scott-heron
March 31, 2007 11:26 AM | Report Offensive Comment
no, unfortunately, the world will not end; it's just going to drag on and on and on. -gil scott-heron
March 31, 2007 11:23 AM | Report Offensive Comment
All:
And Westerners think the Twelvers are nuts?
March 31, 2007 9:15 AM | Report Offensive Comment
All:
And Westerners think the Twelvers are nuts?
March 31, 2007 9:09 AM | Report Offensive Comment
David,
My comparison of an IBM stock fall to the destruction of NYC was that both are predictions. Are you saying you can see the future? My point was that many people, religious and not have predicted the future.
You assume I do not know who Jesus was or what the bible says. My religious training is extensive in the Roman Catholic tradition. The inconsistencies in the bible and the bible's outright statements that God considers slavery normal, beating slaves normal (except killing them, that's a no-no), genocide is ok and in some cases required by God, and many more examples, is more than troubling to me. You only need to look at how christians act, in many cases while quoting the bible, to understand that the bible is not the good book you think it is. If you have read it, you know the parts I'm talking about and have been used to justify genocide, murder, racism and many other vile acts against other people. Our president and his lying followers is just one small example.
I would be the first to say that Jesus was an awesome guy, more so if you consider he was just another guy, not the son of God with super powers. His speaking truth to power is refreshing and I think that's why he had so many followers. He basically was saying through his teachings that the Hebrew God was not what the Torah said he was. Instead of the God of the Jews who went to war with the Hebrews, he was a God who loves his children, all people, even sinners. This new paradigm is why Jesus had followers.
Your claim that archeology proves the bible is overstated. Because some parts of the bible have some archaeological evidence is no reason to take the rest of it, including the interpretations of the apostles, as, well, gospel. Many parts of the Quran have also been shown to be archaeologically accurate. Does that prove that Mohammed rose to heaven at God's hand?
You acceptance that your God can command followers to go into cities and destroy all its inhabitants, including children, is chilling and reminicent of bin Laden's logic at killing thousands, including children, as God's will. Religion has been used by man to justify wonderful things, and horrific things. The problem I see in believers like yourself is that if you become convinced that NYC should be destroyed by 2010 because God wills it, you just might try to make it happen to please God. That is more than just wrong, its psychotic.
Lets start with some basic beliefs. Do you believe the earth is about 6,000 years old as the bible says? If so, how do you handle the scientific disagreement with that when you accept scientific findings that agree with the bible?
March 31, 2007 9:09 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
Im sorry I didnt want to write an essay like yourself. In response, you obviously have no knowledge of the matters at hand. First of all comparing the annihilation of the U.S. to an IBM stock is way too drastic. Nice try though. But in the OT God declared several cities which at the time were cities in comparible to New York and other major metropolitans of our time. Ex. Tyre, Sidon...etc. The thought of these cities becoming destroyed and proclaimed either uninhabited or never to be a flourishing city again is the equivolent of us saying New York would be destroyed and never inhabited ever again. But yeah, go ahead and reduce your metaphor to an "IBM stock???"
Secondly, Jesus IS God. Genesis 1:26..."Let us make mankind in OUR image, in OUR likeness."
Therefore who's we? Jesus has been and always will be. That is the doctine of the trinity. He called himself the Son because He was in the flesh. There are plenty more I could go into about that one but maybe you should search for that yourself. I guarantee you won't be upset about what you find.
Third, I think you have been misinformed about the historical accuracies of the Bible. Archaeoligically (hope i spelled that right :) the Bible has been proven over and over again only to be discredited by those who follow their own humanistic reasoning, such as yourself. And as far as God commanding the Israelites to destroy cities and kill all who were in them; Yep, that's what he did. Sounds bad I know. But what you fail to realize is that God gave everyone several chances to repent before judgement was released upon them. Noah preached to his fellow citizens for 150 years before God brought the floods. Plenty of chances + no repentence= judgement. It's too bad Fate that you cannot and will never be able to come up with any archaelogical evidence or be able to disprove the Bible with an historical inaccuracy EVER. All you can use to debate is your simple human reasoning. How can one understand spiritual topics if one is not of a spiritual essence. Instead you resort to mortal reasoning which brings you to unintelligent human reasoning.
And end time prophecies were written not just 400 years after the death of Christ but through the many prophets of the OT, Ex. Daniel which was written somewhere in the 628 B.C. range. Its amazing huh Kate when you recieve the facts. But please do not take my word for it because I know you won't. Please investigate the matters yourself in an open minded manner and I pray that you can know Christ like I do. I think you have been led improperly in your beliefs. Especially in how Christ can change your life. I hope you can challenge Jesus and find out the Truth. And obviously according to your response you have questions not answers. Ask me anything and I promise a return with the Truth so that you may experience life with Christ. God bless you Fate.
March 30, 2007 10:49 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Fate,
Im sorry I didnt want to write an essay like yourself. In response, you obviously have no knowledge of the matters at hand. First of all comparing the annihilation of the U.S. to an IBM stock is way too drastic. Nice try though. But in the OT God declared several cities which at the time were cities in comparible to New York and other major metropolitans of our time. Ex. Tyre, Sidon...etc. The thought of these cities becoming destroyed and proclaimed either uninhabited or never to be a flourishing city again is the equivolent of us saying New York would be destroyed and never inhabited ever again. But yeah, go ahead and reduce your metaphor to an "IBM stock???"
Secondly, Jesus IS God. Genesis 1:26..."Let us make mankind in OUR image, in OUR likeness."
Therefore who's we? Jesus has been and always will be. That is the doctine of the trinity. He called himself the Son because He was in the flesh. There are plenty more I could go into about that one but maybe you should search for that yourself. I guarantee you won't be upset about what you find.
Third, I think you have been misinformed about the historical accuracies of the Bible. Archaeoligically (hope i spelled that right :) the Bible has been proven over and over again only to be discredited by those who follow their own humanistic reasoning, such as yourself. And as far as God commanding the Israelites to destroy cities and kill all who were in them; Yep, that's what he did. Sounds bad I know. But what you fail to realize is that God gave everyone several chances to repent before judgement was released upon them. Noah preached to his fellow citizens for 150 years before God brought the floods. Plenty of chances + no repentence= judgement. It's too bad Fate that you cannot and will never be able to come up with any archaelogical evidence or be able to disprove the Bible with an historical inaccuracy EVER. All you can use to debate is your simple human reasoning. How can one understand spiritual topics if one is not of a spiritual essence. Instead you resort to mortal reasoning which brings you to unintelligent human reasoning.
And end time prophecies were written not just 400 years after the death of Christ but through the many prophets of the OT, Ex. Daniel which was written somewhere in the 628 B.C. range. Its amazing huh Kate when you recieve the facts. But please do not take my word for it because I know you won't. Please investigate the matters yourself in an open minded manner and I pray that you can know Christ like I do. I think you have been led improperly in your beliefs. Especially in how Christ can change your life. I hope you can challenge Jesus and find out the Truth. And obviously according to your response you have questions not answers. Ask me anything and I promise a return with the Truth so that you may experience life with Christ. God bless you Kate.
March 30, 2007 10:49 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David wrote:
---What's wrong with you people?---
Not a good way to start off a conversation David. I'm raising my shield...
---All there ever is is an ignorant non-logical, no proof answer to your thinkings.---
Something tells me I'm about to hear the same from you. Now I'm unsheathing my sword...
---Of course God exists and that God would be Jesus.---
Of course... no proof needed, right? Just proof He doesn't exist. Nice debating position to be in, making the other guy prove a negative. Must be nice to frame the debating rules, you can pontificate but I must prove things.
---The Bible has been considered a credible source for centuries with historical accuracies beyond any other form of literature.---
Considered credible by who? Christians? Hahahahahahaha, great logic. Why not just argue that English is the one true language because it has worked so well for those who continue to find it so useful? Everyone should learn English right? And don't forget the Quran is just as historically accurate if not more. What does that prove? Maybe you should convert to Islam?
---If I told you that the U.S would no longer exist after 2010 and it happened would you listen to what I say?---
And if I said IBM stock was about to take a dive, and it did, would you annoint me as a saint? Predicting the future is not a holy act. Christ and his followers did a pretty poor job of it themselves.
---Well, God did that in the Old Testament on several occasions but you still fail to listen to REASON.---
God said slaves should be beaten in the OT. God said for the Hebrews to destroy whole towns, men, women and children. God said a lot of things. Do you believe them without doubt? Do you own slaves which God said was ok? Do you beat your slaves?
---The Christian God through Jesus is the only God in any religion that demands that we TRY to prove Him wrong with the same conclusion for anyone who knows the Bible historically and culturally that Jesus is God.---
More logic? If you accept Jesus is God, then Jesus is God. What do you say when you read in the NT that Jesus never said he was the son of God. Was Jesus a liar?
---Now for these all to be true we have to say that the end times according to many writers of the Bible are true.---
Yes, if you have a belief that the bible is completely true, then the bible is completely true including the end times which were written about 400 years after Christ died. I understand that part of your "logic". Belief trumps reason even if the belief was written down some 4 centuries after Christ died. But if your belief is absolute, what about owning and beating slaves? God allows it right?
---You cannot believe in what parts of the Bible you want and try to discredit the others.---
Then why don't you think slavery is ok? Or maybe you do...
---It is so much easier to believe that there is no God.---
Do you believe in no Ganesh? Do you believe in no Zeus, no Thor? You'll probably say its not a matter of belief, and I would agree with you. Belief is positive. You believe in God, I do not believe in God, but I do not "believe that there is no God". Think about it and it will make sense.
---That would make life in this world so much easier but instead I choose to "build my treasures in heaven."---
Ah heaven. The reward of every religion past and present, or did you think the Hebrew God invented it? Ever read the book of the Dead? Heaven is the carrot of all religions. Guess what is the stick? Carrots and sticks are used to enforce a person's actions and beliefs, like using rewards and punishments to keep your dog's behavior the way you want it. Let me ask you this ... Do you accept God or fear God? I would be much happier if God was enforcing these carrots and sticks, but He is not, it is people called priests and rabbis.
---We have only a short time here compared to eternity after the physical death.---
Where were you for the past 15 billion years?
March 30, 2007 3:44 PM | Report Offensive Comment
What's wrong with you people? All there ever is is an ignorant non-logical, no proof answer to your thinkings. Of course God exists and that God would be Jesus. The Bible has been considered a credible source for centuries with historical accuracies beyond any other form of literature. If I told you that the U.S would no longer exist after 2010 and it happened would you listen to what I say? Well, God did that in the Old Testament on several occasions but you still fail to listen to REASON. The Christian God through Jesus is the only God in any religion that demands that we TRY to prove Him wrong with the same conclusion for anyone who knows the Bible historically and culturally that Jesus is God. Now for these all to be true we have to say that the end times according to many writers of the Bible are true. You cannot believe in what parts of the Bible you want and try to discredit the others. It is so much easier to believe that there is no God. That would make life in this world so much easier but instead I choose to "build my treasures in heaven." We have only a short time here compared to eternity after the physical death.
March 30, 2007 1:39 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Mo wrote:
---to those who have all the reson of the world,tuck all your reason toghether and try to creat just one atom of the air that you reasonably breath,or bring the rain that grow food for your sustanance,or use your reason paradigm to create your own smart universe.---
Atoms and their components are created in particle accelerators all the time, including particles created from "nothing" (the vacuum). Here a nice article describing something people made but it seems God could not make, antimatter atoms: http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=345336
Rain has been made since around 1950 through cloud seeding. Piece of cake!
Science has not created a smart universe, whatever that is, but certainly has moved our knowledge and understanding of the universe to the point where the weather can now be predicted relative accurately 10 days in advance. Do you think the weatherman goes to the local church to get that forcast? Where do you go when you've had a life threatening accident, your church or the hospital? Do you want your food blessed or have it scrutinized by the FDA testing? Do you pray during a power outage that the power be restored or do you call your local electric company?
And this is something I've always wondered about: prayer. Do you pray and if so do you really think your prayers get God's special attention so he will do you a favor? I find it amazing that christians believe they can summon the power of God. I remember Robertson asking people to pray that a hurricane's track change. Why would God respond to prayer? Is He your servant?
March 30, 2007 9:49 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Hate to splill the beans, but all belivers are histoy. Doomed. As are those who don't believe.
I have this on good authority. Look up. To God a squid is an important as we are. So are ants, whales, a pine tree, whatever. God does not score His life beyond what each contributes to the whole.
Unfortuately we humans are on the way out. We deract from substaing and nurting life. We'e failed. We're no longer needed. And we can try to protect ourselves with a myth of a minor preacher strung up on a cross.
We detract from the whole.
Was that minor preacher strung up on the cross important to God? No. In fact, God knew nothing about that, and he would never care in any case. It was a politcal killing. The same sort of things we currently at war against.
There was no Jesus who came back from the dead. That legend proceeded him by about 2100 years. Virgin birth, maybe 3000 years of recorded history. Rising from the grave? How far do you want to for that myth
It' too easy and it records the inseurity of makind.
March 30, 2007 2:56 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Hate to splill the beans, but all belivers are histoy. Doomed. As are those who don't believe.
I have this on good authority. Look up. To God a squid is an important as we are. So are ants, whales, a pine tree, whatever. God does not score His life beyond what each contributes to the whole.
Unfortuately we humans are on the way out. We deract from substaing and nurting life. We'e failed. We're no longer needed. And we can try to protect ourselves with a myth of a minor preacher strung up on a cross.
We detract from the whole.
Was that minor preacher strung up on the cross important to God? No. In fact, God knew nothing about that, and he would never care in any case. It was a politcal killing. The same sort of things we currently at war against.
There was no Jesus who came back from the dead. That legend proceeded him by about 2100 years. Virgin birth, maybe 3000 years of recorded history. Rising from the grave? How far do you want to for that myth
It' too easy and it records the inseurity of makind.
March 30, 2007 2:54 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Mo: "if you fail ,just tuck your reason in your scientific legs and make a good U turn"
Frankly, this is pretty silly. Basically what you are saying is that because humans can't do everything yet, there must be a God. Two hundred years ago, you might have said "try to fly through the sky with the birds or travel to the moon and look down upon the green Earth". Now it's creating atoms and bringing the rain. If we figure out how to do that, what will you use?
Anyway, we don't need to make it rain on demand. Thousands of years ago we invented irrigation, which is much more reliable anyway. :)
Mo: "and admit that the allmighty creator exist,then humble your self and reason and listen to what he tell you, above all he is your creator and master."
No, I don't think I will, thanks.
March 28, 2007 9:43 PM | Report Offensive Comment
The Bible taught that Jesus returned in that first generation of christians, marked by the collision of the "nations" gathered with Rome and the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70 C.E. There will be no more "appearances" at some supposed "end of the world." Apocalypticism has been a thorn in the side of Christian theology, and it is high time we de-eschatologize our conversation with it. The world would be a much better place with "end time" views, whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian.
Samuel M. Frost
www.thereignofchrist.com
March 28, 2007 12:26 PM | Report Offensive Comment
The Bible taught that Jesus returned in that generation of christian, marked by the collision of the "nations" gathered with Rome and the destruction of Jerusalem in 66-70 C.E. There will be no more "appearances" at some supposed "end of the world." Apocalypticism has been a thorn in the side of Christian theology, and it is high time we de-eschatologize our conversation with it. The world would be a much better place with "end time" views, whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian.
Samuel M. Frost
www.thereignofchrist.com
March 28, 2007 12:25 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Mo wrote:
---if you fail ,just tuck your reason in your scientific legs and make a good U turn and admit that the allmighty creator exist,then humble your self and reason and listen to what he tell you, above all he is your creator and master.---
This logic has been used to allow the murder of non-believers, the demonizing and thus hatred of those outside a religion, and to take away a person's human rights. Once you believe that YOUR God is MY God, you begin to build walls, which causes fear resulting in hatred resulting in doing things against your better judgement to protect the religion, not to protect yourself. Your logic that not being able to create an atom means God exists is as simplistic and brainless as me saying that since you cannot create an atom the flying spaghetti monster exists. But that would be silly right? You have no idea how insane you sound.
Consider following my religion: Last Thursdayism
In Last Thursdayism we believe the universe and everything in it including ourselves was created, by God, last Thursday. Your memories, your job, your family, everything was created in place last Thursday. Next Thursday (tomorrow), the universe will end and judgement day will be upon us. You have until then to abide by the religious beliefs that you were created with and sell all your possessions as your memory says Christ said you should and give them to the poor. Failure to do so by Thursday at midnight means you will not go to heaven. You might say starlight is hitting the earth from billions of lightyears away so the earth is older than one week, but I'd just say the light was created in transit. God makes anything possible. So, I say to you:
just tuck your reason in your scientific legs and make a good U turn and admit that the allmighty creator exist,then humble your self and reason and listen to what he tell you, sell your possessions and wait until midnight on Thursday for salvation. For above all he is your creator and master and failure to abide by Last Thursdayism means your soul will be forever damned. If you don't believe it, prove me wrong.
March 28, 2007 8:20 AM | Report Offensive Comment
What is very disturbing is the pre-mature ending of the lives (world) of Shiites by Sunnis and vice-versa on a 24/7 basis both following the dictates of the same book. And yet Victoria and other Muslims never condemn these actions or their "good" book. Such utter stupidity!!!, a stupidity that threatens to involve the world in a potential "ending it all" scenario.
It is time for Muslims to rewrite their book!!!!! Maybe ethanol will force their hands.
March 28, 2007 6:18 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Amin to that MO- even the greatest scientist in the world is still only utilizing materials created by god and cannot produce one drop of water-
since every single person here will one day die-
it seems very foolish to dismiss it as though it were something that happens to someone else-
interestingly enough- stephen colbert is discussing the end of the world with madeline albright now on tv-
he just gave her a 'welcome 12th imam' t-shirt
(hes hedging his bets)
March 28, 2007 1:39 AM | Report Offensive Comment
reason rage vs faith.
the end of faith=end of life .
rise of faith = rise of life .
to those who have all the reson of the world,tuck all your reason toghether and try to creat just one atom of the air that you reasonably breath,or bring the rain that grow food for your sustanance,or use your reason paradigm to create your own smart universe.
if you fail ,just tuck your reason in your scientific legs and make a good U turn and admit that the allmighty creator exist,then humble your self and reason and listen to what he tell you, above all he is your creator and master.
rebbeling would not take you any where ,you live in his earth that he created,and under the sky that he created,and breath the air that he created ,and devour and soak the food and water that he created ,the brain that you reason with he also created,so no escap .
March 28, 2007 12:44 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I bet you all $100 each that Brad's end times scenario doesn't come to fruition in our lifetime. Any takers?
March 27, 2007 4:01 PM | Report Offensive Comment
DEAR Brad L. Burge
Thanks you so much for showing us the TRUTH, given us in your website, which you advertised above.
Without you to show us sweet Jesus' way, where would we all be?
You are indeed sent from Jesus to save all us wretched sinners!
Thank you, Brad! Jesus brownie points for you!
March 27, 2007 3:28 PM | Report Offensive Comment
DEAR Brad L. Burge
Thanks you so much for showing us the TRUTH whech you give us in your website, advertised above.
Without you to show us sweet Jesus' way, where would we all be?
You are indeed sent from Jesus to save all us wretched sinners!
Thank you, Brad!
March 27, 2007 2:18 PM | Report Offensive Comment
It's ALL crud!!
It's just that that Iranian, Islamist FREAK will take us all with him on his fanatsy apocalypse journey!!
Although HIS apocalypse will come sooner than he expected if he hurts our Marines/Sailors he kidnapped!!
I hate all you religious NUTS...
March 27, 2007 1:50 PM | Report Offensive Comment
I just find it very amusing that christian America laughs when Iran's president Ahmadinejad says the Hidden Imam is about to appear, a Shia belief not unlike the return of Christ. Why do they laugh? Because its a silly notion, except when you ask whether its as silly as Christ's second coming, then it turns serious. They cannot be compared. The delusion of the Hidden Imam cannot be compared with the certainty of the second coming. It is like a crazy person who think's they are Napoleon laughing at another crazy person who thinks they are Henry VIII. It just baffles me how a thinking person can live with the delusion and obvious inconsistancies, and even go to war to protect the delusion. But maybe that's the issue, thinking is limited in all religions to boundries drawn by the religion, boundries not to be crossed upon pain of hell and damnation.
March 27, 2007 11:51 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Dear Rm6:4,
You have it right.
Many interesting details of the end-times are revealed when a Christian lense is used to examine Judaism; including the new Sanhedrin, the Seven Laws of Noah, and Hasidic Kabbalah. A free consice e-book, "Satan's Hoax," is available by clicking on my name (a link) above. Enjoy and share if you like.
Maranatha!
March 27, 2007 7:23 AM | Report Offensive Comment
There are several possible perspectives to this question:
1) A question seeking a scientific prognosis upon the planet or universe that we inhabit.
2) Or many more subjective levels of meaning.
-- In that non-scientific, philosophical/religious scope, the "end of the world questions" are similar to "meaning of life" questions, in that some people often presuppose that there is only one, universal, absolutist answer.
One answer may be that the "end of the world" is when one dies. The phenomenonal world which is all that is known to a person dies when that person dies. The meaning of life is similarly large and yet ostensibly personal in scope. There may be many meanings and many ends of the "world."
And yet, there is another aspect -- "End of the world" 'hysteria', where a person or group of people believe an impending end of the world coming in their lifetimes.
Perhaps such people emotionally, subconsciously sense a surging feeling of the mortality and fleeting impermanance of their lives.
Or then again, it is experienced when one is on the verge of revolutionary, internal, psychological change within oneself. A radical transformation of one's inner self is in effect, the death of one's personality and the rebirth of another. The symbolism of this pattern is seen in various religions, and in various rituals.
Such a strong change perhaps could be felt as if the entire world is thundering and transforming, since perception of the world is tied to how the person feels and sees.
Thus the experience or promise of religious rebirth and transformation could be described as an "end of the world" feeling.
If the person is not aware that this feeling is actually, and merely subjective, then it could be felt as if reality is impending upon a world shaking end. Feeling the oncoming encrouchment of radical change, especially within oneself, could be frightening.
Such internal revolution need not be bad, but it does bring to mind "end of the world" cults that have had the misfortune of mistaking their subjective psychologically experienced reality, for absolute reality.
Other examples of the reasoning error where subjective reality is mistaken for universal reality could be when one person strongly believes that his/her subjective perspective, value system, prejudices and fears (including paranoia) should or would apply universally to everyone.
--jsp akha Volt Rare
March 27, 2007 12:47 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Do you mean the universe will come to an end, or just the planet earth? If you mean the earth then science says "yes", faith says "so what". If you mean the known universe then science says "no?” faith says "so what". If you mean the unknown universe then science says "?", faith says "so what".
However, a few Christians have this thing set on a thirty-year plan with infinite resets. One expires every year, and one is set every year. This process started in Paul's time.
If the question is the earth only, then:
Science says "yes", but gives no date.
Faith says "so what, don't quit your day job".
A few Christians say "Thirty Years".
None can be proven wrong.
However, where in this discussion is the Constitutional issue of imposing the laws of a particular establishment's Articles of Faith upon the rest of us?
March 26, 2007 6:16 PM | Report Offensive Comment
---Do you believe the world will come to an end? If so, where, when and what will it look like?---
Please tell me, how do I get a job at the Post where I can ask one question a week, with someone to help me, as a full time job? I hope they're not paying these writers too much. We type away for free. Maybe the Post should let us ask the questions. I'm sure we'd be more intelligent than the ones Meacham and Quinn have been coming up with...
But what the hey, I'll play along. The earth has about 4 billion years left. Around that time the Sun, which is burning hydrogen to helium via nuclear fusion and helium up to heavier elements until it makes iron. That's where the nuclear burning stops. Iron, being heaviest and cannot be fused into a heavier element, sinks to the Suns core where is accumulates, the iron core will get bigger and bigger. The lighter elements are still burning is a shell around the iron core. As this shell expands due the Sun's expanding iron core, the Sun's surface gets hotter and will expand. It will get so big that it will engulf all the inner planets, including earth, but probably not as far out as Jupiter. No more earth. As the shell gets bigger and thus further away from the Sun's center, the nuclear fusion, which relies on temperature and gravity, decreases and the nuclear burning will eventually stop. The Sun, which is now a red giant star with a surface out past where Mars used to be begins to collapse due to the heat from the nuclear burning being gone. The Sun's gas will collapse. The gas will slam into the iron core and possibly cause a nova (not a super nova, the Sun's too small to make a super nova). The nova will blow off most of the outer gas leaving a small dense Sun, a white dwarf, not much bigger than the earth, which will continue to shine from residual heat. But your decendents probably won't get to see this since the earth was vaporized when the Sun expanded out to our orbit. If they learned to live on Jupitor, the nova will blow it apart. They'll need to leave the solar system before the nova. Start praying that NASA, in the next 3.9 billion years, can get us off this rock and onto another planet, one that has a few billion years of lifetime before its Sun goes nova. That or sit back and relax and let your kids worry about it, you know, like they will have to worry about the national debt, social security and medicare.
Our culture seems happy to push off crises to the next generation. Why is this one, even if the evangelicals have it right, any worse? At least with their version of the world ending they get to go to heaven. Maybe they want the world to end sooner so they won't have to pay their high mortgages, fund medicare and social security, or pay for their kids college. If you ask me, believing in a God-driven end of the world is wishful thinking by a bunch of cowards afraid of working to make the future better for us and our children. Go to church and pray for your soul ... I'll recycle, encourage less use of oil, and go to work to make the world a better place for my children and for yours too.
March 26, 2007 4:45 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are forms of socially sanctioned lunacy, their fundamental tenents and rituals irrational, archaic and more importantly when it comes to matters of humanity’s long-term survival, mutually incompatible. There are names for people who have beliefs for which there is no rational justification. When their beliefs are extremely common, we call them ‘religious’; otherwise, they are likely to be called ‘mad,’ ‘psychotic’ or ‘delusional.’ ‘’ To cite but one example: ‘’Jesus Christ—who, as it turns out, was born of a virgin, cheated death and rose bodily into the heavens—can now be eaten in the form of a cracker. A few Latin words spoken over your favorite Burgundy, and you can drink his blood as well. Is there any doubt that a lone subscriber to these beliefs would be considered mad?’’ The danger of religious faith is that it allows otherwise normal human beings to reap the fruits of madness and consider them holy.’’
Criticizing a person’s faith is currently taboo in every corner of our culture. On this subject, liberals and conservatives have reached a rare consensus: religious beliefs are simply beyond the scope of rational discourse. Criticizing a person’s ideas about God and the afterlife is thought to be impolitic in a way that criticizing his ideas about physics or history is not.’’
A zippered-lip policy would be fine, a pleasant display of the neighborly tolerance that we consider part of an advanced democracy, if not for the mortal perils inherent in strong religious faith. The terrorists who flew jet planes into the World Trade Center believed in the holiness of their cause. The Christian apocalypticists who are willing to risk a nuclear conflagration in the Middle East for the sake of expediting the second coming of Christ believe in the holiness of their cause. Such fundamentalists are not misinterpreting their religious texts or ideals. They are not defaming or distorting their faith. To the contrary, they are taking their religion seriously, attending to the holy texts on which their faith is built. Unhappily for international community, the Good Books that undergird the world’s major religions are extraordinary anthologies of violence and vengeance, celestial decrees that infidels must die.
In the 21st century when swords have been beaten into megaton bombs, the persistence of ancient, blood-washed theisms that emphasize their singular righteousness and their superiority over competing faiths poses a genuine threat to the future of humanity, if not the biosphere: ‘’We can no longer ignore the fact that billions of our neighbors believe in the metaphysics of martyrdom, or in the literal truth of the book of Revelation,’’ he writes, ‘’because our neighbors are now armed with chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.’’
I have a particular ire for religious moderates, those who ‘’have taken the apparent high road of pluralism, asserting the equal validity of all faiths’’ and who ‘’imagine that the path to peace will be paved once each of us has learned to respect the unjustified beliefs of others.’’ Religious moderates are the ones who thwart all efforts to criticize religious literalism. By preaching tolerance, they become intolerant of any rational discussion of religion and ‘’betray faith and reason equally.’’
The human need for a mystical dimension to life like mysticism and other forms of knowledge, can be approached rationally and explored with the tools of modern neuroscience, without recourse to superstition and credulity.
At this time Islam is the reigning threat to humankind. Much like a gruesome, Inquisition-style Christianity of the 13th century only leads us to believe not all cultures are at the same stage of moral development,’’ I couldn’t help but think of Ann Coulter’s morally developed suggestion that we invade Muslim countries, kill their leaders and convert their citizens to Christianity.
I will say this of Faith: it has been the foundation of every religion, every cult, every sect, every religious terrorist organization that desired to gain advocates whose will greatly exceeded their intelligence. When a religion asks that its followers believe all that it declares, and to do so without evidence, it speaks volumes of the intent and meaning of that religion. These churches, temples and mosques, they will keep their followers in the shadows of millennium past. Evolution is still howled as the great enemy of faith. It simply has the greatest following of scientists and evidence. It's not scientifically that any religion has ever tried to debunk Evolution. They brought forth no evidence. They claimed no new discoveries. Their only tactic was to point to tattered and very old scriptues -- to flip through the pages, and read the rancid words, almost as if they were pure gold. Faith does not require investigation, or evidence, or demonstration, or observation, or logical deductions. It simply requires that a person believe, in spite of what evidence may say: it requires that a person blindfolds themselves when demonstration is shown, to use earplugs when anyone speaks of logic, and to turn away at every reason for them to believe what Faith tells them is wrong. Those cults and sects which have utilized violence for the realization of their apocalyptic future -- they required nothing but the willpower and a great deal of Faith.
March 26, 2007 4:23 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Marvin; I have my tea-towel. I'll be fine...;-)
March 26, 2007 3:38 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Tim, This is only a discussion. When you close your mind to other ideas of thought and surround your self with like-minded thinking, solutions rarely present themselves.
March 26, 2007 1:36 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Really, what is this question for? Did you guys have an off day and couldn't come up with something better?
March 26, 2007 1:18 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Actually, the world is going to end when the Vogons destroy the Earth to make way for an intergalactic superhighway. Didn't you get the warnings from the dolphins?
March 26, 2007 1:00 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Uh, Tim, click on the link that says "All Panelist's responses". It will take you here:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/2007/03/end_of_the_world/all.html
Where you will find a wider range of opinions, including flakes like Cal Thomas and Chuck Colson, if that's more to your liking...
Regards
A Hermit
March 26, 2007 12:52 PM | Report Offensive Comment
What a farce, is this discussion supposed to be 'fair and balanced'? You have a Jewish religious thinker, and Muslim one, an anti-christian one, and even the Christian one says that the ware in Iraq is caused by Christian (NOT Muslim, just Christian) religious fundamentalism. No reason for me as a Christian to read on! Obviously, my views are not part of this discussion.
March 26, 2007 11:29 AM | Report Offensive Comment
What a farce, is this discussion supposed to be 'fair and balanced'? You have a Jewish religious thinker, and Muslim one, an anti-christian one, and even the Christian one says that the ware in Iraq is caused by religious fundamentalism. No reason for me as a Christian to read on! Obviously, my views are not part of this discussion.
March 26, 2007 11:28 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I think the world will end as we know it, but I dont' think it will happen during our lifetime or the next generations lifetime.
As for there being signs to prove that the apocalypse is near, people have been seeing them for thousands of years.During plagues, changes in weather patterns (ie-more frequent and intense storms), wars, etc. The world is constantly changing, inside and out. I think it's terribly ignorant to not see how people and technology have affected some of those changes.
I took an ecology course when i was in college, and we learned so much about how mankind has changed the landscape to suit it's needs, how we cut into the mountains for ore, gold, and other minerals, not to mention blasting them apart to accommodate the railroads, tunnels or just regular roads. We learned how landslides are created by clear cutting and how certain farming methods have depleted our soil of nutrients. We have clogged our waterways for thousands of years with corpses, human waste, chemicals and an outrageous variety of things we consider disposable (diapers, air conditioners, cars, soda and beer cans, just to name a few that i've seen through the years) and now we are harvesting reefs and killing off more sea life than our overfishing has been doing.
Quite frankly, the earth is an ecosystem that can exist without human beings. we are the scourge about it, not the cockroaches, parasites or bacteria that we fear will outsurvive us. humans as a species have proven themselves very innovative, but mostly in ways meant to kill, destroy, maim, change and overcome all that surrounds itself. Does that mean that I've lost hope in it's ability to wake up and smell the coffee, no. Energy never dies, it just changes forms. Hopefully, we humans can take our energy, and turn it into something positive and productive. Proper planning prevents poor performance.
March 26, 2007 10:45 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I think the world will end as we know it, but I dont' think it will happen during our lifetime or the next generations lifetime.
As for there being signs to prove that the apocalypse is near, people have been seeing them for thousands of years.During plagues, changes in weather patterns (ie-more frequent and intense storms), wars, etc. The world is constantly changing, inside and out. I think it's terribly ignorant to not see how people and technology have affected some of those changes.
I took an ecology course when i was in college, and we learned so much about how mankind has changed the landscape to suit it's needs, how we cut into the mountains for ore, gold, and other minerals, not to mention blasting them apart to accommodate the railroads, tunnels or just regular roads. We learned how landslides are created by clear cutting and how certain farming methods have depleted our soil of nutrients. We have clogged our waterways for thousands of years with corpses, human waste, chemicals and an outrageous variety of things we consider disposable (diapers, air conditioners, cars, soda and beer cans, just to name a few that i've seen through the years) and now we are harvesting reefs and killing off more sea life than our overfishing has been doing.
Quite frankly, the earth is an ecosystem that can exist without human beings. we are the scourge about it, not the cockroaches, parasites or bacteria that we fear will outsurvive us. humans as a species have proven themselves very innovative, but mostly in ways meant to kill, destroy, maim, change and overcome all that surrounds itself. Does that mean that I've lost hope in it's ability to wake up and smell the coffee, no. Energy never dies, it just changes forms. Hopefully, we humans can take our energy, and turn it into something positive and productive. Proper planning prevents poor performance.
March 26, 2007 10:41 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I am always amazed at the ability of people to put the cart before the horse. They speak of spirituality or God as if their existence is established. In fact, there is no reason to presuppose the existence of either.
As for the question of the world's end there are two most probable outcomes: 1. the Big Crunch if gravity wins out over expansion or 2. infinite expansion.
If the former, yes the world will end. If the latter it will go on forever. But the issue of forever is a tricky thing. Forever implies the action of time. In a far-distant universe where entropy is maximized how can time be measured? It may have no meaning, and to invoke temporal terms like "forever" may be meaningless. As meaningless as to invoke "God."
March 26, 2007 9:46 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Yes the world will end. The beautiful symetry that defines the universe seems to dictate that there was a beginning and there will be an end. That being said I really haven't given much thought to when it will happen. To me this is a waste of time. I prefer to spend my time pondering the wonders of the creation and creator rather than its demise. When it's over it's over knowing when it will come won't change it's inevitabilitiy.
Because I ascribe to no religious doctrine I feel less bound by the fear and anxiety brought on by the notion of the end of time. If anything I embrace it as a passage to another realm of interaction with and understanding of the wonders of creation, life and the grace of God.
Live for Love.
March 26, 2007 8:21 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Do I believe the world will come to an end ? It's kind of like asking "will the universe come to an end" We can not destroy what we did not create, like our selves, our consciousness comes from a more ethereal place, so does the earth. It's like saying you can kill a plant, but not the root. It will always be there.
We know very little about the origin and true nature of both ourselves and the universe, although some say we are really smart because we can send a man to the moon, or rid the planet of some diseases. But the fact remains that we are still living in a world of chaos, where war and killing continues everyday. Where hunger and poverty still exist. We have much to learn.
March 26, 2007 8:18 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Garyd, I reject the concept of "interpretation" of scripture. From what I can tell, different interpretations amount to different claims of what God meant by the words. I agree with Harris about discarding the idea of scripture being the literal or inspired word of God and then letting the text's literal reading stand or fall on its own. But I disagree with Harris spending so much time savaging the literal reading, when Biblical literalists make up only a small percentage of the world's Christians.
"far from being Jefferson's work of a mad man Revelation is very like the work of a rather optimistic historian."
No, I think Jefferson was right the first time. Much of Revelation is about God slaughtering unbelievers because of their beliefs, and I find that idea to be abhorrent. When I read the text literally, I conclude that the end of pain and suffering is only for God's elect, and everyone else will endure suffering for eternity.
"The evidence is indeed that there will be wars and rumors of wars until the end of time, that plagues great and small will ravage humanity off and on for centuries. The historical record is quite clear on all of that."
And I agree. But that is not the view of literalist Christians. They see such troubles as warnings of the imminent vengeance of an angry God, instead of an inevitable part of human life.
March 26, 2007 8:18 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Daniel, thank you I agree, Until we as a human race stop using religion as an excuse to not participate in our own destiny we are doomed. Gluttony, murder, and apathy all hide behind the veil of religion. The best minds would be better served to help Gods creations flourish and develop, not wait around to see what happens. If God does exist, I would feel much more comfortable explaining why I didn’t know Him/Her or praise Him/Her, rather than why my waiting for Him/Her aided in the demise of some of His/Her greatest creations.
Point of view is dependent upon where you stand, be it in the Americas, the Middle East, Europe Israel, China, and upon the many different religious viewpoints as well. Respect the diverse points of view, but remember the one common footing that everyone of us (including Jesus) has had our feet on, from which we all share our points of view, earth. We, as tenants, on and in the two greatest vessels ever known, (as humans), had better learn to take control of our own fate, otherwise religion becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. I’m sure there will always be multitudes that are just sitting waiting for the Lord to come and suck them up to heaven with His/Her dyson vacuum, like potato chips from between the cushions. It’s time to get in the game, otherwise, if there really is a God we’ll all have a lot of explaining to do, and you’d better hope the vacuum hose goes up!
March 26, 2007 2:30 AM | Report Offensive Comment
reason age.
sadly,people in march 2007 still sitting in their cynderala cold storage phiosophy salon,mellowing and entertaining,motion or not motion,static or dynamic,pysique or metaphique,biology or syntheitic ,reason or dogmatic,conscious or none conscious,morality or devility,virtue or none virtue,evolution or
downgradeation,begining or the end,now or then !.
death or none death,automatic or gear,computer command control or orgainc .
human beings issues answered long long time ago,just humble your heart and reason and read the last divine revelation(quran)mercey to your body and reason.
March 26, 2007 12:52 AM | Report Offensive Comment
justwondering:
To consider the nature of personal consciousness seems an oversight. Awed by our intellectual capacity, our vision dims. Each person arrives on planet earth with a wide-open consciousness. Enters an already existent world; and so did the whole of humanity; and so did planet earth, itself.
There is an overall scheme. A physical world appears in a mind. Essentially life seems a REAL-IDEA interchange. We enter not only a material world, but a pre-existent world of thought as well.
As the physical world preceded human consciousness, to comply with this overall real-idea scheme, suggests a pre-human consciousness should also have existed,--to perceive it.
Lets entertain the idea pre-human consciousness did exist, is what brought the physical world into existence; which brought humanity into existence; and is what we refer to as God.
The physical world is governed by steadfast natural laws. Natural adaptation is one of these laws. A human mind is formed through body mechanics. The nervous system and physical senses deliver environmental reflections. A human body will adapt, or copy the environmental activity. Especially evident in the behavior of little children, and variable educational circles and cultures.
Now, this mind formed by the physical environment; would be very insignificant, in comparison to the nature of a consciousness capable of bringing a physical world into existence.
In fact, this mind formed by the physical machine is not consciousness at all. Consciousness is the holder of these perceptions! The natural arrangement is for perceptions to be delivered to the invisible person, the SELF;--to personal consciousness. Therefore, it would seem the natural arrangement is for SELF-control. Instead, we allow the environment,--the perceptions,--the body mechanics to form habits,--and so control,--or dominate activity.
Progress essentialy seems a transition from physical, to SELF-control; for the individual, and humanity. An escape from the mind formed by the physical senses, to the realization of truths. Physical principles as photosynthesis or gravity; behavioral principles as love or forgiveness; entered our world from, and are realized only deep within personal consciousness. The common thread in all our celebrities is that each separated from a mind acquired from an immediate environment to follow personal convictions.
This question of beginning and end could be the most obvious example of our failure to abandon our adaptive mind of physical appearances. The beginning and end mentality may prove an entirely human predicament. A mentality formed by 'a physical world gone wrong'. Planet earth and its inhabitants may have been brought into an already existent place with an entirely different mentality than that formed by defective physical mechanisms!
Evidence lies in the fact that this motion that brings things to an end is incompatible to our intrinsic conscious nature. Perhaps why we have psychological defense mechanisms. These could be adaptive mechanisms to protect an intact perfect SELF.
The physical world in its natural state, and the intrinsic arrangement for homeostasis is compatible. Evident in the appreciation of love and harmony expressed in art, literature, music, architecture, poetry and morality.
Where did oppressive activity, predatory motions that bring things to an end come from? Why would a physical world with an intrinsic harmonious arrangement for homeostasis, and appreciation of that arrangement by its top of an evolutionary chain product; hold motions as disease, predator-prey inter-relationship, earthquakes, floods or winds that cause sufferring and bring things to an end?
Is it not possible the arrangement of our anatomy and physiology could show original intent to copy and enjoy a compatible everlasting world? That we are not authentic, but may have been given access to an everlasting conscious existence through physical machinery? That a conscious dimension exists beyond 'the machine'? In which case, could another existence have caused disruption to the physical program?
I believe we search for a beginning because we had a 'beginning'. Were introductions to an already existent world. Given access to an existence that has no 'beginning' and no 'end'. That our mentality was not restricted within this range of physical thought. Human ideals as equality, truth, freedom, peace and love could be vestigial memories. Our separation from that world may not be of a linear; but of a conscious nature.
The physical environment is no longer in its original state. All has deviated from norm. Predation, or an overpowering force is what brings things to an end. Conscious adaptation, or copying that activity by humanity hastens direction toward an end. So, unless we escape from that mentality, we well could become extinct;--in fact have the intellectual ability to destroy, to end physical existence.
I do not think that will be the case. Because the body and environment do not define 'life'. Personal consciousness,--SELF is the life of the body;--of our world. From here emerged an energy, that with only a rudimentary release by the American Constitution rapidly moved us toward truth and compatibility.
The physical world is our world. We are not entirely conscious beings; but 'human' beings. To experience life, we need the machines. The physical body and environment are our 'life-support'machines. Thought moves the body. The most intrinsic need of personal consciousness is happiness;--which is dependent on satisfaction of human ideals.
These common ideals are not acquired frm the physical environment, and can't be communicated in the usual manner of physical instruction. I believe they exemplify the 'Will' of what we call God; that it is also the 'natural will' within personal consciousness. Through these natural conscious energies God can be here, there and everywhere. We can see that the gradual abandonment of these ideals by the medical and teaching professions, pharmaceutical and insurance corporations, religious establishments,and our government over the past four decades; enslaves and becomes incompatible to basic human nature. The public awakens. Demands restoration of direction toward common welfare.
Yes, I believe the human predicament is all due to separation of personal consciousness; from each other and God! That the capacity for humanity to correct this,--to come together in deepest thought is also a part of natural adaptation; a natural conscious affinity,--that will restore a perfect human world!
Because actually--where we can form, and control a physical mind,--personal consciousness is different,--forms a human 'spirit',--becomes an unlimited energy----can't be amputated!
Whatever the cause of motions that overpower and bring things to an end,--there is no question it is the evil we need to eradicate,--and the means exists deep within personal consciousness.
justwonderingtoo!
March 25, 2007 8:11 PM | Report Offensive Comment
The infantilism on this thread really is incredible. The whole manichaean idea of good vs. bad lacks the simplest understanding of human nature. And to project a "God" in "heaven", who acts according to these lowly human superstitions, with the primitive human traits of fear and greed, revenge and reward is the pinnacle of foolishness.
The "judgment day" idea (stemming, btw, from a wrong translation) always has been and, alas, as proven here, still is nothing but a transparent means to wield power over simple minds. It has always worked.
And to imagine that these folks all vote - no wonder the world is in this desperate shape.
I am leaving, thank you.
March 25, 2007 4:15 PM | Report Offensive Comment
who give life to the bones when they rott away?
doesnot man see that we have created him from nutfah(mixed male and femal discharge).yet be hold!he stands forth as an open opponent.
and he puts forth for us a parable, and forget his own creation.he says :"who will give life to these bones when they have rotted away and became dust?"
say, he will give life to them who created them for the first time!and he is the all knower of every creation!
he ,produces for you fire out of the green tree ,when behold!you kindle therewith.
is not he ,who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them?yes, indeed!he is the all knowing supreme creator .
verily,his command,when he intends a thing ,he only that he says to it ,be! - and it is !
so glorified be he and exalted above all that they associate with him,and in his hands is the dominion of all things, and to him you shall be returned.
quran.yasin v77.
1-is the creator equal to who creat not?
2-wich is easyer initiating and originating or giving life back and returning?
3-life ,death are serious proof for the hour .
March 25, 2007 2:58 PM | Report Offensive Comment
The *world* will not come to an end, but corrupt humans and their institutions on this planet will. The earth will then be restored to a paradise as it was originally designed to be. Those humans remaining will eventually become perfect in mind and body and live forever in harmony with the rest of creation under a perfect government of God himself. -- This is the only thing that keeps me wanting to get up each day in the the face of our country's (the U.S.) current wretched situation.
March 25, 2007 9:58 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Harris, tonio, proved nothing except that he is a worse interpreter of scripture than the fundmentalists he condemns and that's going some.
There is no seven years of tribulation, and the end times countdown began the moment Christ asceneded into heaven and far from being Jefferson's work of a mad man Revelation is very like the work of a rather optimistic historian.
The evidence is indeed that there will be wars and rumors of wars until the end of time, that plagues great and small will ravage humanity off and on for centuries. The historical record is quite clear on all of that. The optimistic part is that God will bring an end to it a some point in the future.
March 25, 2007 9:19 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Has it occured to any of you that you might ALL be wrong? What are the odds of any one of these posts being 100% accurate when our little clump of mud sits near the outer fringe of a galaxy comprised of +200XE9 stars in a universe of galaxies of at least that magnitude? You are a no more than a droplet of spittle in a sneeze and yet profess to be able to discern the entire context of a Pacific Ocean?
Science - leading the race for knowledge - doesn't yet know squat, and the religionists are at least 5000 years behind that (though - in some aspects - not many, but some - you might even be in the lead). The problem is, you believe that some immortal god would bother to create you, give you a brain capable of rudimentary reason, then tell you to completely abandon that ability so you can worship it in eternal life after it allows you to suffer death that it can't possibly imagine (being immortal) with a whole brain full of unanswered questions. Makes sense - if that god embodies absolute evil.
Truth be told, I imagine that that god - if it existed at all - would use the religionists' kind of belief to weed out the undeserving. After all, if this god is as omniscient as believed, what threat would such an inferior (though reasoning) creation pose to it?
Will the Earth end? Yes. Some of you have the final red giant toasting correct, but it could be sooner. There are objects floating out in the Oort cloud that could cause Earth's demise much sooner. That isn't really the problem though. What - or who - is life? What is conciousness? We can't even answer these most basic of questions. When anyone can come up with a reasonable answer to these questions, intelligence on Earth may finally be born.
Just Wondering
March 24, 2007 11:22 PM | Report Offensive Comment
'more secular violence in Iraq & Afghanistan'. This is heard almost daily in the media. The violence is not secular but religious!'. You will never have to worry about an atheist becoming a suicide bomber!
March 24, 2007 8:42 PM | Report Offensive Comment
To World Religion,
Here is my profiles that I just discovered it last 1997-2000 and contiune, I hope this will be helpful for you whom read my profiles that will be your answers. http://profiles.yahoo.com/ily2uily
Thank you, Blessings!!!
March 24, 2007 8:17 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Do you believe the world will come to an end? If so, where, when and what will it look like?
My belief is that the question should be what exactly is the human race doing to assure its continued existence and how much it is depending on pure accident or not really caring at all about an existence in the earthly, material sense and is mostly concerned with an afterlife in the religious sense.
The more the human race is not concerned about taking its destiny in its own hands and assuring its existence in the earthly, material sense the more we can say it depends on pure accident or consoles itself with an afterlife in the religious sense.
The less the human race takes its destiny in its own hands and assures its existence in the earthly, material sense the more we can say the end of the world is contracted into merely the probable end of the human race, for the world itself will continue apart from man until it meets its fate with the demise of the sun.
All hinges on whether man will take control of his own destiny or simply depend on accident--or prefer the religious belief in an afterlife. And my belief is that man really does not contemplate taking his destiny in his own hands, therefore if he continues to survive it will be purely by accident.
I foresee the end of man before the end of the world in the sense of the earth being burned up by the sun--and the end of man long before the demise of the solar system let alone the universe itself.
Man quite simply does not demonstrate what it takes to take his destiny in his own hands.
In fact we can easily imagine measures which would assure the human races survival much more than actions being taken today. Our imagination is such that we are clearly aware that we are not doing all we can do and that we fall back on just letting things run their course and hoping for the best.
If the human race really wanted to assure its existence, for example,--and I of course mean in the earthly, material sense and not in some sort of metaphysical sense--we all would have an increased spirit of self-sacrifice in the direction of locating the most gifted among us and pushing them to the forefront--and these gifted people themselves with an increased spirit of abnegation.
What I mean exactly is something of recognizing our copyright and patent laws as nothing more than a system of locating the gifted, and as we get better at it dispense with copyright and patent and simply push the gifted to the fore to such a degree that the absence of copyright and patent cannot possibly lead to plagiarism, etc.--for there will quite simply be too many gifted and committed persons to put up with nonsense and they all will in fact be bent on creating and dying, creating and dying and pushing humanity higher and higher toward superhumanity which will make all of us increasingly not worth remembering.
But of course the world is far from that today. In fact what I have just described looks like merely a type of totalitarianism to people today.--Which is why I say we really just depend on accident and in fact hope in an afterlife in the metaphysical sense.
The question is not whether a person believes the world will come to an end but whether we at all have any faith now the human race will live to leave the world (earth) by its own invention. All the details about the human races failure are irrelevant (what the end of man will look like and when it will occur...However we do know it will occur on earth...).
Let me stress once more that we now clearly have the imagination to consider what the human race should do to increase its chances for survival but that such measures look like a type of totalitarianism to most people. We are talking about it being inculcated in school that we all are nothing more than links in a chain toward superhumanity, that self-sacrifice must increase, that we must seek out and defer to the gifted, that in fact intelligence must increase without however the seen and unseen dangers of such.
Our politics today is remote from such contemplations. And religion of course has no integrity in the matter because it defeats the whole purpose of such right from the start by positing the possibility of an afterlife apart from man's own hands, an afterlife given by God.
My belief is the world (earth) will outlast man unless man is just lucky. I believe man will bring about his own demise--or be saved from such by God or something. At least we hope we will be saved by God from such before we realize it is we ourselves that have botched everything. Certainly we can see today we are ruining much and that if there is a God he is saving us from only our own stupidity.
But what kind of God is the God of the stupid unless the hope of the stupid in something better than themselves and what can save them? In this case the end of the world will be when the human race really feels stupid and gives up, simply turns to God, and that day does not seem far off what with weapons of mass destruction, the destruction of the environment, etc.
The end of the world. What a question. The question should be whether the human race will see the end of the century and the beginning of another. If so, perhaps hope in a new world.
March 24, 2007 1:31 AM | Report Offensive Comment
It really boggles the mind that people really
believe this idiocy. There is more truth in
Harry Potter books then the bible, Harry Potter
at least wasn't censored, written, rewitten,and
formulated to enslave women.
Here you have a blogger believing in Noah's
flood. If this is a true story then it only
proves that the god you believe in is insane.
To destroy it's own creations and proclaim
"Thou shalt not kill" is hypocrisy at it's
worst.
This god of yours is a terrorist at best, in fact
if those of you believe in the devil and believes
that the devil is the height of deviousness then
who is to say that the devil isn't the god
that is protrayed in the bible in order to
keep you from seeking true knowledge?
March 23, 2007 1:30 PM | Report Offensive Comment
I was just wondering whether anyone expressing a string of "spiritual" notions, such as "Just as it was in the day of Noah, so shall it be when the Son of Man returns . . . .," can feel a specific part or side of the brain becoming very active. Wouldn't it be interesting to analyze the brain waves of someone experiencing a feeling of spirituality?
March 23, 2007 1:14 PM | Report Offensive Comment
It really boggles the mind that people really
believe this idiocy. There is more truth in
Harry Potter books then the bible, Harry Potter
at least wasn't censored, written, rewitten,and
formulated to enslave women.
Here you have a blogger believing in Noah's
flood. If this is a true story then it only
proves that the god you believe in is insane.
To destroy it's own creations and proclaim
"Thou shalt not kill" is hypocrisy at it's
worst.
This god of yours is a terrorist at best, in fact
if those of you believe in the devil and believes
that the devil is the height of deviousness then
who is to say that the devil isn't the god
that is protrayed in the bible in order to
keep you from seeking true knowledge?
March 23, 2007 12:31 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Yes. The world as we know it WILL end. When that will be, no one knows. There will always be skeptics who say differently. There were also those who said it wouldn't rain when Noah said it would. Most people have the "Missouri" mentality - I won't believe it unless I see it for myself. When it rained for the very first time in Noah's day, no one had ever seen rain before. Not believing doesn't make a thing untrue, and it certainly didn't make the rain stop. Just as it was in the day of Noah, so shall it be when the Son of Man returns. If we knew when that time was, we'd do what we always do - wait until the last minute and hope we make it in. In this instance, it's about who and what you know. Someday, when you least expect it, it will all be over. REALLY! But on the other hand, seeing IS believing. If you don't believe me, just wait and see!
March 23, 2007 12:16 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David, you wrote:
"So how did all those prophecies come to life then if he knew nothing about them being uneducated and all? Because He must have been God? Instead of Christians having to explain our beliefs, how about non-Christians explaining their non-belief in Christ. Prove to me that Jesus wasn’t God! You cant because you use human reasoning, not proof."
What prophecies are you talking about? I haven't seen any come to life, have you?
I am not asking you to explain your beliefs, because that would be an exercise in futility. Most people I know who fervently belief in religion have been indoctrinated from early childhood and they need to desperately cling to a faith. Actually, I think that has to do with fear of the unkown and some feeling of inferiority. Please, do not think that I mean this derogatory. I am just stating my feelings.
I thought I have explained why I can not be a Christian. I do not believe the Bible to be divinely inspired. It is a book compiled from many different writings and authors, some of whom weren’t even alive when Jesus was preaching. Why is there not one book in the bible that was written by a member of his immediate family? Why didn’t he write it himself? I view the good book as a he said/she said novel. If I want to know the truth, I go to the source. I don’t ask 20 other people what they think the truth is. Does that make sense?
As far as proving Jesus wasn’t God, of course I can’t proof it. Just as you can’t proof that he was. If anything, he was/is the son, but he is not God. By the way, I understand Satan is a son too. And all the other angels, etc. Aren’t they son and daughters as well?
Oh, well! All I can say is, I have my own faith and it does not include any organized religion. I think that if we strive to be the very best we can be, to be kind and understanding, to give when there is a need, to not harm anyone in our lifetime, then we have fulfilled the our destiny of earth. What comes after, if anything, is a mystery.
March 23, 2007 11:50 AM | Report Offensive Comment
RM 6:4
To reiterate:
As per Father Edward Schillebeeckx, the famous contemporary Christian theologian, God does not know the Future. From his book, Church: The Human Story of God, "Therefore the historical future is not known even to God; otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings. For God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."
And if God does not know the future, Mohammed, Jesus, Joseph Smith and Isaiah surely did not.
In two sentences of profound common sense, Schillibeeckx has reduced the OT, NT, the Book of Mormon and the Koran to good but wishful thinking of many ancient scribes.
This falls correctly in line with two of God's greatest dependent gifts, i.e. Free Will and Future.
Pause and think about it!!!
Now consider:
“I believe the Bible is inspired.” “Why?” “Because it says so.”
Would anyone let that logic pass if it came from the followers of any other book or person? “I believe x is inspired because x says so.” Fill in the blanks:
x=Pat Robertson
x=the ayatolloah Sistani
x=David Koresh
x=the Koran”
Plus this:
There is no archeological evidence that the Moses of the OT ever existed. The scribes who wrote the OT, embellished many old Jewish tales/legends/myths to fit their concept of Monad and to keep the general tribal communities in line with oral tradition/guilt. The trails/trials of Noah, Abraham, Job and Moses were concepts for tribal nomads/peasants/shepherds/ordinary folk living in the age of illiteracy, short life spans, hardships, diseases, and "dirt poor" living conditions. Mankind has advanced and these concepts although wise for the ages, are not historical.
The evolutionary process continues with contributions from the historical Buddha, John the Baptist, Jesus, Paul, the NT scribes, Constantine, Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Schillebeeckx, the Jesus Seminar, Crossan, Mother Theresa, and the Hubble Telescope.
March 23, 2007 11:48 AM | Report Offensive Comment
According to my Scripture
Which my Faith Tells me is Infallibly True
The world will end
when a truck full of Hostess Twinkies
drives off a bridge and
crashes into a Liquid Gas Tanker,
causing an explosion that detonates
a nearby electrical plant
and a Vision of the Baby Jesus
will fill the skies the whole world over
and all men will lie down in terror
and begin speaking Hungarian flawlessly.
March 23, 2007 11:39 AM | Report Offensive Comment
What a bunch of crap. Sure there is a chance
that humanity will suffer in the not too distant
future, but it won't be because Christ is returning.
Global warming, eruption of Yellowstone National
park, or any of the many global threats around
the world.
If this world ends because of war it will come
at the behest of organized religion which is
the real Weapon of Mass destruction.
Nothing separates humanity then having all these
different religious cults believing that their
god is the only god.
Christ will return, and he will return by the
year of 2075, but his return will not be to
send evil doers to hades and lift believers up to
heaven, his return will be to correct the mistake made by Saul that created an organized
Christian religion.
Christ was Jewish, he never converted to a religion that didn't exist, Christianity didn't
come about until 600 years after Christ's death.
Proverb: If you fear your own godliness you
will create a god that you fear.
March 23, 2007 11:37 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Though I have not read every entry in this blog, I can say that most that I have read contain little or no truth or reason. The Bible is explicit and clear... Jesus will return, bodily, to this earth. Prior to His return, there will be great troubles upon the earth - such as was never seen in times past. These troubles will come for a two-fold purpose. 1) To pressure people to seek the true and Living God - and perchance they will cry out for salvation. 2) For a judgement upon those that have rejected Jesus Christ.... When Jesus comes, the world as we know it will be gone. The King of Kings will rule and we will have true peace on this earth.
March 23, 2007 11:06 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Ruth K, you say "How will this world end? It will end by a star falling from sky."
You seem pretty sure of that. How do you know? Is that somewhere in the Bible? If so, could you point out the reference?
March 23, 2007 10:37 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I believe this world will come to an end, and sometimes it seems close by, but Jesus said, "No one knows the day or the hour, only my Father in heaven." It really does not matter. We must be prepared. My world or your world could end at any minute. We do not know when the Lord will take us from this life. Until that moment, we need to live life to the fullest by doing His will!
March 23, 2007 8:47 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I believe this world will come to an end, and sometimes it seems close by, but Jesus said, "No one knows the day or the hour, only my Father in heaven." It really does not matter. We must be prepared. My world or your world could end at any minute. We do not know when the Lord will take us from this life. Until that moment, we need to live life to the fullest by doing His will!
March 23, 2007 8:46 AM | Report Offensive Comment
So W. Post/Newsweek, I guess you guys have officially run out of relevent questions.
Great job!
March 23, 2007 12:27 AM | Report Offensive Comment
How will this world end? It will end by a star falling from sky. It will be at night. Most of living things will disappear but not entirely. Peace will come to Earth....and starts new again as before, no computers..but loving people who care for one another and they will live without modern technology. This is the cycle of the entire universe. Never ending.
March 22, 2007 10:35 PM | Report Offensive Comment
The Our Father was given to us by Jesus directly from the Father in response to the question "how should we pray?" "World without end. Amen." When this prayer is said- we are agreeing to the fact the world will not end. There will be an end of the age....as there has been before. we cannot go on offending God by our selfishness, leaving Him out of creation, and ignoring the oppressed! After a chastisement-there will be an era of peace... without tv, computers and all electrical interferances. We forget why we were created..."to know,love and serve God."
March 22, 2007 8:58 PM | Report Offensive Comment
The Our Father was given to us by Jesus directly from the Father in response to the question "how should we pray?" "World without end. Amen." When this prayer is said- we are agreeing to the fact the world will not end. There will be an end of the age....as there has been before. we cannot go on offending God by our selfishness, leaving Him out of creation, and ignoring the oppressed! After a chastisement-there will be an era of peace... without tv, computers and all electrical interferances. We forget why we were created..."to know,love and serve God."
March 22, 2007 8:56 PM | Report Offensive Comment
LOL,when the world will end isnt known, nor can it be predicted, what is known is that in about 4 billion years the moon will have pulled far enough away from the earth to cause major climactic and geographical upheavals thus possibly ending some or even all life. but the planet will remain largely intact. those concerned with the extinction of the human race shouldnt be, as there have been many dynamic and quite successful creatures that have dominated this planet at one time or another and eventually died off.no big deal something will replace us as best it can.
March 22, 2007 8:54 PM | Report Offensive Comment
The world will end when I die. As far as I'm concerned, of course.
March 22, 2007 8:31 PM | Report Offensive Comment
jacob what the hell are you talking about?? is that your own religion? that was the most hippy crap ive ever heard in my life.
March 22, 2007 8:20 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Life on earth will end before the earth itself does. In the end it'll just be cockroaches eating the remains of our remains. Then after a few billion years it'll all just blink out of existence. I won't be around to see it so I don't worry about it. I'm much more concerned about global warming killing off humanity. That will be ugly and I might be around to see it.
March 22, 2007 8:12 PM | Report Offensive Comment
In my opinion and based on my understanding of my faith, the world is not going to end but rather be changed. Some may ask in what way?
My answer is that the world will be changed by the elimination of all that is evil. Call it a restoration to it's original state of being "Good, Very Good."
Billy
March 22, 2007 7:28 PM | Report Offensive Comment
AMVIENNAVA- i posted on the other blog where you asked this question- but still wonder what does that have to do with the price of tea in china-
muslim-bashers are referred to any muslim panelists posts where they are in abundance-
how on earth cn you expect me to answer for why ottomans or any man acts with inhumanity to their fellow man?
do you really expect an answer?
that is the question of the ages isnt it?
bigger brains than mine have failed to find any answer for that one unless you just say some humans are brutal and abuse other humans-
in that regard all humans races sexes religions philosophies are sadly equal.
March 22, 2007 7:20 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Gaby,
To call Jesus "uneducated" would be a statement of complete ignorance. Even if Jesus was not God, He must have studied so hard to memorize all of the prophecies concerning His coming. But then again your right Gaby! He probably did not have too much of an education at all being just a simple carpenter. So how did all those prophecies come to life then if he knew nothing about them being uneducated and all? Because He must have been God? Instead of Christians having to expain our beliefs, how about non-Christians explaining their non-belief in Christ. Prove to me that Jesus wasnt God! You cant because you use human reasoning, not proof.
March 22, 2007 6:39 PM | Report Offensive Comment
As per Father Edward Schillebeeckx, the famous contemporary Christian theologian, God does not know the Future. From his book, Church: The Human Story of God, "Therefore the historical future is not known even to God; otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings. For God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."
And if God does not know the future, Mohammed, Jesus, Joseph Smith and Isaiah surely did not.
In two sentences of profound common sense, Schillibeeckx has reduced the OT, NT, the Book of Mormon and the Koran to good but wishful thinking of many ancient scribes.
This falls correctly in line with two of God's greatest dependent gifts, i.e. Free Will and Future.
Pause and think about it!!!
March 22, 2007 6:14 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Some readers might enjoy this five-minute video blog on YouTube by (Episcopal) Father Matthew Moretz.
(Executive Summary: Revelation is symbolism of God's view.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFmfDRKcWx8
March 22, 2007 6:01 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David, you are more than welcome to your faith. You may have found YOUR truth in Jesus and so be it. To me, Jesus was an uneducated carpenter who couldn't even write his own Bible. Had he really been God, he should have whipped that thing out in the blink of an eye. At least then I wouldn't have to wonder who wrote what, when, and under which influence. As it is, he didn't do that. Nor did God ever write anything down in any other religion. Instead he supposedly chose to use "prophets".
You may have a hard time believing it, but I do believe in God. Just not the God that is described in any so-called holy book.
March 22, 2007 5:04 PM | Report Offensive Comment
"ama :
I think that any attempt to answer this question constitutes evidence of mental illness. I hope that you all have the good sense to ignore it.
March 21, 2007 10:14 AM"
My thoughts, exactly.
What an IDIOTIC question - what a WASTE of space on a bully pulpit.
It just proves my point that ORGANIZED RELIGION is the REAL danger to civilization.
The egotistical audacity of any human to "know" what an "end of a world" would be.....
Goooood grief.
Some peanuts thrown to the "christian faithful"
JUST IN TIME FOR EASTER!
As the CHURCH LADY said...
"Now, ISN'T that SPECIAL..."
March 22, 2007 4:49 PM | Report Offensive Comment
David, you say, "You have to study the Bible to truly understand its meaning."
I agree. it's not an easy read - nor should it be, written so long ago in completely different styles than what we're used to today, and translated and copied so many times.
Unfortunately, many people today read the bible and decide it says whatever they want it to say - and then decide everyone should agree with that interpretation.
Truly pitiful. You've got a brain - and an education -- use them - get your nose out of that one, old book
March 22, 2007 4:47 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Gaby what you fail to realize is that Jesus IS God and there is proof. You do not understand that Jesus in the flesh was God on earth but becuase he was in the flesh (as human) he had to partake in the mortality of humanity, leaving Him as He was on earth to be the Son of God. But in heaven as the Father. Of course you would think that its contradicting, Jesus would pray to His Father in heaven, which seems like a contradiction. But I urge you to study the matter more and realize that some things cannot be taken at face value. You have to study the Bible to truly understand its meaning. Trust me, I went through the same thing you thought and found the Truth in Jesus. And since the Truth is real, the end time prophecies are too. So many prophecies have come to pass. Just research it and you can find no faults. Things written a 1000 years before they happened (scientifically proven) and occured in minute detail. And the things to come will happen as well. So, dont be ignorant in things you say which have to proof but just opinion. Jesus urges us all to prove him right and according to James "challenge everything." So do that with an unbiased conscious and you will find all that is written in the Bible to be the true Word of God.
March 22, 2007 3:58 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Child Abuse: Fear of Hell Indoctrination
Controlling a child with the indoctrination of the fear of hell, that the child will Burn if she doesn't obey God (and her parents), that she is a creature full of sin,
IS by any reasonable definition from professional psychological bodies
psychological *abuse* of a child.
Jesus (or whomever) coming at the last day to "pour out his wrath on the sinners", as one other poster here so sweetly puts it,
is a profoundly destructive myth in its effect on the psyche's of the children who are subjected to it.
March 22, 2007 2:32 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Nothing is eternal. all is meant to be broken. The holy books call this day a very terrible day ( this thousands of years ago; imagine that); with the exception of rapture ready folks; all others call it the end; judgement day.
March 22, 2007 2:29 PM | Report Offensive Comment
For some Christians like the followers of John Haggee, Christianity has gone beyond being Doomsday cult into becoming an actual suicide cult. These Jim Jones characters are peddling a WW3 scenario that is not from the Bible, but more like the race war Helter Skelter preached by Charles Manson. Besides, their contrived patchwork narrative of the end of the world is lifted from Zoroastrianism, which the Jews would have gotten in bits and pieces while in Babylon. Our modern Millenialists are peddling the Babylonian narrative, which makes them PAGAN not Christian.
Besides, according to Hal Lindsey, the world ended in 1988. Didn't you get the memo?
March 22, 2007 2:28 PM | Report Offensive Comment
We are living in the End Days now according to the messages given to the late Veronica Leuken by Jesus and the Blessed Mother and many of the Saints at Our Lady of the Roses Shrine in Bayside New York where over 300 messages of worldwide importance were given for all mankind from 1970-1995 during rosary vigils which still go on to this very day. To ready the messages and find out the miraculous happenings at the Bayside Apparition Site visit www.smwa.org or e-mail me about my personal experiences over the years going to the rosary prayer vigils.
March 22, 2007 1:09 PM | Report Offensive Comment
"“As for the exact day or hour, no one knows it, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father only” (Matthew 24:36)."
Very interesting! Where does that leave the trinity? On numerous other topics in these blogs, people state that Jesus is Lord, that he is God in the flesh, that they are one and the same.
So, as usual, the Bible contradicts itself.
Either Jesus is God in the flesh, then he knows when and how the end of the world will come, or he is not, then there is not trinity.
Just confirms my belief that all religions are a bunch of hooey, made by men for men to keep the populace in line. Divine inspiration? My foot!
Too much grape juice, shrooms, or whatever, and everyone can have a divine inspiration.
March 22, 2007 1:00 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Victoria @ March 22, 2007 9:54 AM
For documentation you may reference The Ottoman Centuries by Kinross. There are other documents, including the histories of the subjects of the Ottomans.
For someone who likes instructive posts about Islam (I grew up in an Islamic country by the way), you are not informative about past and present practices.
I was looking for an explanation, and would still appreciate one, however.
March 22, 2007 12:17 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Concerned Christian Liberated!
Your right. These people are false prophets...
Explore Catholic theology and you will find that it is nothing like some of the modern day lunatics who spread there faith with fear propaganda.
True Faith and reason is spread through love and compassion.
March 22, 2007 11:25 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Think about this logic (or lack thereof).
“I believe the Bible is inspired.” “Why?” “Because it says so.”
Would anyone let that logic pass if it came from the followers of any other book or person? “I believe x is inspired because x says so.” Fill in the blanks:
x=Pat Robertson
x=the ayatolloah Sistani
x=David Koresh
x=the Koran”
March 22, 2007 11:16 AM | Report Offensive Comment
AMviennaVA says: "A trait of Ottoman rule was to hold their Christian subjects in the cities hostage. Every 15 years or so, on Fridays, the gates would be locked, and after Friday prayers, the faithful would engage in an orgy of massacres lasting from 1 - 4 days."
I never heard of that one. It's possible though, I suppose. Sounds a lot like the anti-Jewish pogroms European Christians used to carry out regularly, right up into the twentieth century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom
March 22, 2007 11:15 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I'm a Catholic and I don't concern myself with the end of the world jargon. Just live your life and enjoy family, friends and give back to society when you can.
Enjoy life my friends... For what other purpose do we have then to serve each other in charity, hope, love and truthfulness.
March 22, 2007 11:11 AM | Report Offensive Comment
The bible says that the end of the world will come when the earthy governments bring an end to false religion . All religion will be destroyed. And the one that’s is left Jehovah’s Witness , the governments will try to destroy them but with no avail. Then That’s when Jehovah God steps in and wipes the unrepentant off the face of the
March 22, 2007 11:09 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Josh, the difference between the end of the Sun's life and the various religions' teachings about Armageddon is that the former is not described as a punishment from a vengeful supreme being.
March 22, 2007 10:49 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Athena,
The Sun won't actually Supernova, it will become a Red Giant and then a White Dwarf. It will still mean the end of the world, though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#Life_cycle
March 22, 2007 10:43 AM | Report Offensive Comment
the day the undertaker unties your shoes is the end of the world for YOU.
March 22, 2007 10:37 AM | Report Offensive Comment
not me AM- theres plenty of places in this wide world to express oneself-
March 22, 2007 10:32 AM | Report Offensive Comment
The world will end when Victoria and AMVIENNAVA fight it out for Faith Chat supremacy.
March 22, 2007 10:26 AM | Report Offensive Comment
AMVIENNAVA- YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING
i think youre somewhat new to these boards-
generally accuasations of such a horrific nature would require some substantiantion-
since youve stated a thing as historical-
i request you give several sources-
historical instances always have many sources
personally, i only use references tht comefrom those represented- (only jewish opinions for jewish issues etc)
youre not familiar with my many posts, usually i ignore such slanderous finger pointing-
i dont EVER do it myself and see little purpose for it-
however ill give you the respect that you may be citing a historical fact
you are off topic,but im used to off topic muslim-bashing and try to answer it when it happens unless it is aggressively vitriolic
March 22, 2007 9:54 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I plan on ending the world myself when I use a "tractor beam" to pull a huge golden asteroid into a direct collision course with Earth.
Muahahahahaha!
March 22, 2007 9:25 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Victoria or V or any Muslim poster:
The blog has taken an interesting turn. There is a clarification I would like from Muslims:
A trait of Ottoman rule was to hold their Christian subjects in the cities hostage. Every 15 years or so, on Fridays, the gates would be locked, and after Friday prayers, the faithful would engage in an orgy of massacres lasting from 1 - 4 days. (Those must have been very persuasive sermons delivered by the muezins). It served to keep the 'slaves' in the countryside obedient, since they tended to have family in the cities.
Granted the Ottomans empire is gone, but I have noticed similar events in Iraq, especially in the early days of the insurrection: following Friday payers, the faithful would engage in some atrocity against those of the other sect (Shia or Sunni).
My question is WHY still?
(I realize that the past year or so, by which time Iraqi society has become essentially segregated by sect, the practice has abated).
March 22, 2007 9:05 AM | Report Offensive Comment
i fully believe in judgement day
the how and when only god knows
March 22, 2007 3:17 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I believe we are not living at the end of the world but at the end of a great cycle of time. Most religions have a figure expected at the "end times". Christians have the 'second coming'. Jews have the Messiah. Many Muslims have the Mahdi. Hindus have the Kalki Avatar and Buddhists Matreya. Could all these religions be saying the same thing albeit with a different name? Are we just entering a new cycle of time?
March 22, 2007 1:31 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I know I'd like to get my hands on some of the stuff John was smokin when he wrote Revelations..........yea buddy.
March 22, 2007 12:54 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Yes, the world will end at some point, when the Sun goes supernova a few million years from now. Will humans as we know them still be around? Or will we have managed to kill ourselves off with nuclear war, global warming, fighting over religious differences, etc.? Myself, I prefer to think that we'll get over our differences and colonize other planets before Mother Earth gets absorbed into a supernova
As for the supposed "end of the world" in the Book of Revelations, I've heard that it was a prophecy about the Roman conquest of Jerusalem and the destruction of Solomon's temple in 72 AD. Or the conquest of Rome by the barbarian tribes. Personally, I think that someone ate some funny mushroooms and wrote down their bad trip.
March 21, 2007 10:02 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Why do so few comment on the obvious psychological manipulation of all religions in order to enforce compliance and keep
that tithing coming? (remember "follow the money""?
Three of hundreds of examples:
=Catholics have perfected the art of setting standards that are so impossible that members MUST confess their sins by coming to church regularly, and paying their penance. Most other churches have their version of this.
-The twisted and damaging inculcation in children of the fear of Hellfire and Eternal damnation: a great abomination in my opinion.
=The Mormons' explicit threat that if you DON"T follow the prophet and his laws
you will lose contact with your family in eternity. (Paradise, after the Latter Days)
How do we judge the "morality" of these practices?
March 21, 2007 9:51 PM | Report Offensive Comment
The "references" to rapture in the NT were, as per contemporary NT scholars, added to embellish the sayings and ways of Jesus.
Matthew 24: 38-41 and Luke 17: 34-35
91-. Taken or Left: (1) Gos. Thom. 61:1; (2) 2Q: Luke 17:34-35 = Matt 24:40-41.
See http://www.faithfutures.org/JDB/jdb091.html and Professor JD Crossan's book, The Historical Jesus.
St. Paul's description/prediction of the imminent second coming, i.e. 1 Thessalonians 4: 15-17, was a great way to get Gentiles to convert and give money to the cause but to say the least he was not much of a prophet thankgoodness. Televangelists still use the description/prediction though to get "guilt-trip" donations.
March 21, 2007 9:48 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Its too bad that people cant realize that all the prophecies in the Bible have came true and that the end time prophecies are already being fullfilled. No one knows when its gonna happen but it will. Dont worry atheists, Gods White Throne Judgement will give you another chance to believe in Him.
March 21, 2007 8:34 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Most of you christians are missing one the main points. We only have to respect your "right" to believe in the biblical apocolypse. We DO NOT have to respect the belief itself.
The beliefs of biblical literalists do not deserve any respect, only ridicule.
"It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825
March 21, 2007 7:24 PM | Report Offensive Comment
I believe this concept exemplifies our conscious immaturity. Of thought dominated by physical images and environmental appearance. Of a persistent pre-occupation with oppressive deleterious physical motions,--of environmental control.
Many worlds have ended. Social worlds. As truths enter, and nations are conquered; society adjusts--and worlds change. Still, all retain an oppressive hierarchy system; where status is determined by individual material gain.
Not the physical world; but this conscious world is what I believe will come to an end. The reality,--the world where power control determines direction; and enhances suffering.
Because deep within personal thought exists a common place to which there is equal access. To reach it requires not end of the physical world,--but an escape from oppressive mentality. Nature has endowed us with a primary need for happiness; and made satisfaction dependent on a just social environment.
Oppressive social control,---the governments created by mankind,--are incompatible to our most basic needs for equality, truth, freedom, love, peace and recognition of personal worth. This is the world to which Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed and all the Hindu gods guided us. Not those with material accomplishments, but these people have been the most celebrated in our course.
So, to me this would seem to exemplify our inherent nature. That it is the world of power control, of oppressive thought that will end; and this 'human spirit', which seems an unlimited strength and energy will prevail.
In essence when this is completed,--it will be the second coming of Christ,--because it is not the physical features of Jesus we rever, but the thought,--the manner He treated other people; a behavioral potential to which social reward is not attached, and hence remains buried deep in personal thought!
March 21, 2007 7:08 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Of course the world will end one bright and sunny day. And even "when" and "how" can be debated up till the day the world does actually ends. Maybe we will all have time to point our fingers at each other and exclaim" "See I told you so!"
I just think that this old world will end before her time. Its a shame that we have all these nukes just lying around though. Because even if Mother Earth got lucky and the Human race was killed out by some strange and incurable disease, all those nukes and reactors would poison the atmospehere, and the environment. And thats not counting all the underground bunkers filled with canisters of poisonous gases. All the cans of nuclear waste, etc... They will all eventually rust and spill out too. Yep! We as the Human Race will have left our lasting legacy for sure! Even in death we will make sure that our toys keep on killing everything else. Or heck, maybe one of our leaders will just wake up in a bad mood and hit all the red buttons! And Ka-Boom! Or just some misunderstood and lonely terrorist will start the chain of events to end everything. The possibilities are endless. But its our Planet, and all the other living creatures that will suffer regardless of how the end comes. We, the human race will finally get what we deserve for our arrogance, and selfish behaviors. So be don't be sad! Be Happy!
March 21, 2007 6:30 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Now I can honestly say that the questions are getting stupider and stupider! There is not doubt the world will come to an end, everthing dies at one time or another. When? Anyone's guess is as good as mine! How? Definitely not by the apocalyiptic 4 horsemen! What will it look like? Dead! What else would it look like?
I'll pop in now and then just to see what the religiously infected are coming up with.
March 21, 2007 5:39 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Do you believe the world will come to an end? If so, where, when and what will it look like?
I am interested in limited ends. I have my own end as terminus to think on (Lord, let me know my end as the Psalmist asks). I have my own end - as fulfillment - to think of. The sudden and drastic 'end' as terminus of 'everything' is a purposeless discussion - beyond any realistic limitations I care about. The 'end' as purpose or as completion is what the Bible talks about - yes even in that book of Revelation. Apocalypse simply means what is unveiled. And what is unveiled is the nakedness of God in the flesh of Jesus, exposing how power structures - both political and religious - deal with the even limited ends that I might be competent to be interested in. My terminus (unknown) and my completion (known in part) are in this naked man in his death. I have known the intimation of regeneration as a result of my walk in his way. The invitation to 'put to death' self 'in his death' is an invitation followed by anyone pursuing non-violent resistance to power (whether that of others or one's own) to the end that we would not continue to 'kill the one we love'.
The end will have come when we like wisdom at the foundation of the world are at play. Auden's poem in Britten's Hymn to St Cecelia comes to mind:
I cannot grow,
I have no shadow
To run away from,
I only play.
I cannot err,
There is no creature
Whom I belong to,
Whom I could wrong.
I am defeat
When it knows it
Can now do nothing
By suffering.
All you lived through,
Dancing because you
No longer need it
For any deed.;
I shall never be
Different. Love me.
March 21, 2007 3:57 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Only God knows where, when, and what it will look like. We do know that the world as we know it now will end, but only God knows the time frame.
I know that is true because he told us so in his word. I pray everyday for Jesus return. All he ask of us is to have faith and watch for the signs of the end of days. If some of you think my belief makes me crazy then I am proud to be.
March 21, 2007 3:52 PM | Report Offensive Comment
"A rapid increase in “glacial earthquakes” – caused by sudden large movements of glaciers – over the past few years indicates that warmer temperatures will destroy the Greenland ice sheet faster than expected, a new study warns."
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn8889.html
March 21, 2007 3:26 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Apocalyptic Belief and Mental Illness
If Ama is correct
1/2 of the US Population is Mentally ill.
I do agree that this belief is psychotic. Is it more psychotic than believing in a God who answers your prayers?
That is what stumps me. We generally consider people who believe in God to be mainstream, and the 1/2 of the US population who believe Jesus will return in the next fifty years we consider Wackos.
Is there really such a big difference?
March 21, 2007 1:22 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Apocalyptic Belief and Mental Illness
If Ama is correct
1/2 of the US Population is Mentally ill.
I do agree that this belief is psychotic. Is it more psychotic than believing in a God who answers your prayers?
That is what stumps me. We generally consider people who believe in God to be mainstream, and the 1/2 of the US population who believe Jesus will return in the next fifty years we consider Wackos.
Is there really such a big difference?
March 21, 2007 1:17 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Do I believe that Ieshua will return and take his faithful followers to heaven with him and all the rest go to hell? Not by a long shot.
Do I believe that it is possible for the planet to reach a state of uninhabitability for any species except the cockroach? You bet your sweet bippy, and we're doing it to ourselves.
We continue to poison our air, foul our water, and contaminate our soil. Our insistence on the convenience of disposable items, and our lazy refusal to reuse and recycle whenever possible has our landfills overflowing, and garbage barges chugging up an down rivers with no place to unload their cargo.
We continue to turn a blind eye to the fact that the planet does not belong to us, we belong to her. And we are killing her.
March 21, 2007 12:51 PM | Report Offensive Comment
What we know:
1. The Sun will burn out in 3-4 billion years so we have a time frame.
2. Asteroids continue to whiz by us daily.
3. One large hit and it is all over in a blast of permanent winter.
4. There are enough nuclear weapons to do the same job.
5. Most contemporary NT exegetes do not believe in the Second Coming so apparently there is no concern about JC coming back on an asteroid or cloud of raptor.
Bottom line: the world will end sometime between now and 3-4 billion CE.
March 21, 2007 11:26 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Instead of answering the question, Sam Harris refuted its premise in "Letter to a Christian Nation." The relevant paragraph is quoted at the link below. I hope he contributes an article for this On Faith topic.
http://www.samharris.org/site/book_letter_to_christian_nation/
March 21, 2007 10:37 AM | Report Offensive Comment
I think that any attempt to answer this question constitutes evidence of mental illness. I hope that you all have the good sense to ignore it.
March 21, 2007 10:14 AM | Report Offensive Comment