Religious debate (split from main board)

#277
#277
Oldvol75 said:
Sorry, I have never seen it. I'm more into comedies. I watch things that make me laugh. Like your avatar! I'm either gaging or laughing. BTW, it would be perfect if he was in his underware, then it could be my picture minus the sandals of course.
Click to expand...

tmi
 
#278
#278
IPorange said:
Science is a philosophical process. It will never be complete.
Click to expand...

In all honesty, I understand philosophy and science to be on opposite ends of the spectrum so to speak. Science is based on experiments and results. Philosophy is based on...well, opinions I suppose.
 
#284
#284
BeecherVol said:
I thought he was reffering to Star Wars?
Click to expand...

obi-wan.jpg
 
#290
#290
lylsmorr said:
What brings me to believe in God(aside from being raised going to church) is science. Believe it, The law of conservation of mass(also, the law of conservation of energy) states that in THE NATURAL WORLD, Matter(or energy) cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred.
Click to expand...

As an aside, the Law of Conservation of Mass states that the mass of a closed system is constant over time.

The law is not true for "open" systems, like our planet.

If you need a scientific law to believe in your deity, I'd pick a different one.
 
#291
#291
shootermcgavin7 said:
As an aside, the Law of Conservation of Mass states that the mass of a closed system is constant over time.

The law is not true for "open" systems, like our planet.

If you need a scientific law to believe in your deity, I'd pick a different one.
Click to expand...

I don't need one. On my most basic level, it's a personal choice. I believe. End of story my friend
 
Last edited:
#292
#292
lylsmorr said:
I don't need one. On my most basic level, it's a personal choice. I believe. End of story my friend
Click to expand...

That's fantastic, and I'm happy for you. And I'm incredibly happy when people believe whatever they want, and other people allow them to.

However, I quoted your prior post claiming
What brings me to believe in God
Click to expand...
. I apologize for working off your original statement.
 
#293
#293
shootermcgavin7 said:
That's fantastic, and I'm happy for you. And I'm incredibly happy when people believe whatever they want, and other people allow them to.

However, I quoted your prior post claiming . I apologize for working off your original statement.
Click to expand...

It was poor wording. I realize that now that you say it
 
#294
#294
Oldvol75 said:
Heck, all I want is the complete fossil record. If it is the scientific fact, I would like to see its proof. That should be simple since its taught as a scientific fact.
Click to expand...

Where is the insurmountable, theory-breaking chasm in the fossil record as you see it? What would you describe as the "missing link?"

It's ironic when people who are advocating beliefs systems that are by definition based on faith alone demand 100 % of all possible data, when anyone would be hard-pressed to name all the organisms that ever lived on a typical public toilet, let alone on Earth.

The Bible seemingly doesn't account for any one of a huge number of fossils. I am not sure why the complete fossil record is necessary to show that curious shortcoming.

T-TownVol said:
Who makes up this "scale"?
Click to expand...
I am saying changes in a particular species, or changes in a larger community of species.



T-TownVol said:
It is the "age of information", why do you need me to post it?
Click to expand...

It just seemed you didn't know the distinguishment. Let me help:

Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.

In fact, some laws, such as the law of gravity, can also be theories when taken more generally. The law of gravity is expressed as a single mathematical expression and is presumed to be true all over the universe and all through time. Without such an assumption, we can do no science based on gravity's effects. But from the law, we derived the theory of gravity which describes how gravity works,what causes it, and how it behaves. We also use that to develop another theory, Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, in which gravity plays a crucial role. The basic law is intact, but the theory expands it to include various and complex situations involving space and time.

The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law describes a single action, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena.
Click to expand...

Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method

I'm not trying to be a jerk about this, it's just that there is a big difference in what "theory" means in casual conversation and what it means in science. I mean, gravity is "just a theory" too.
 
#295
#295
IPorange said:
Where is the insurmountable, theory-breaking chasm in the fossil record as you see it? What would you describe as the "missing link?"

It's ironic when people who are advocating beliefs systems that are by definition based on faith alone demand 100 % of all possible data, when anyone would be hard-pressed to name all the organisms that ever lived on a typical public toilet, let alone on Earth.

The Bible seemingly doesn't account for any one of a huge number of fossils. I am not sure why the complete fossil record is necessary to show that curious shortcoming.
Click to expand...

Your turning the question around by asking where I see the missing link. I have only asked for the scientific evidence that links what is taught as a fact. If it without doubt is fact, then this should be an easy thing to come up with one would think. I thought that was science's job to prove or disprove things.

Why is it ironic? Do not people who do not have faith demand the same thing when it comes to evidence for God? Several times alone in this thread questions have been asked as to why we believe and really not excepted as to why we believe.

Why should the Bible have to contain a fossil record? Do you know what a Leviathan was? The Bible has these living in the sea and some on the land. Could these be in the fossil record and be called by a different "scientific" name today?

Why is it important for a complete fossil record? Because people are teaching today that this is the only acceptable fact taught by science. If they are going to be totally honest in their teachings they need to have 100% facts. Afterall, is that not what science demands? Being able to prove things. When there are obivious gaps ie... the missing link you spoke of. IMHO when beliefs are formed off of scientific teachings, then 100% of the facts should be there, if not there, why just have faith that science will eventually fill in these gaps. Science seems to be ever changing, things added things taken away, does peoples faith in science change with these teachings?

This Bible that I read gives me the information that God created. It lays out that the earth was created, days and nights, then atmosphere, then plant life, then animal life, then finally man. Each layed out in sequence where one would benefit the other and allow each to be able to thrive. The Bible even states that God hung the earth and the stars on nothing. Isn't that true? Best of my knowledge there are not strings attached. There are historical records and things are unearthed everyday in the middle east that does comfirm the Bible. For instance up until a few years ago, there was no proof for a man called Joseph in Egypt, well they have uncovered proof of Joseph. Pontius Pilate was at one time thought not to be real, we now know he was. There is outside proof that there was a man named Jesus Christ, that He was cruicified. The list goes on and on. If you are a man that needs facts, look. Don't believe the few things that I told you here simply because I said them. Study these things for yourself, wether or not you believe or not believe is on you. You have the option here. I can't make you or force you to do this, the information is there for your choosing. Do what you feel is best.

Thank you and others for having this conversation. I have truly enjoyed it, and I hope you have too. What ever the outcome of our individual lives may we each find the peace that we all seek. Merry Christmas!
 
#298
#298
BeecherVol said:
I agree that we should pattern our life after Christ, and do the best we can do at it, while we are here. We will never live up to perfection, and we don't have to. Lord knows I haven't.

I take John 14:6 to mean, that Jesus is "the way".
And I take John 3:16 to mean, that if you do not chose to believe "the way" (Jesus), you will perish. Because the alternative is eternal life in heaven.

Im Baptist, but that alone does not save me. My grandfather was Catholic his entire life, being Catholic did not save him either.
Click to expand...

:eek:lol: Does anyone else find this funny?
 
#300
#300
Oldvol75 said:
Your turning the question around by asking where I see the missing link. I have only asked for the scientific evidence that links what is taught as a fact. If it without doubt is fact, then this should be an easy thing to come up with one would think. I thought that was science's job to prove or disprove things.

Why is it ironic? Do not people who do not have faith demand the same thing when it comes to evidence for God? Several times alone in this thread questions have been asked as to why we believe and really not excepted as to why we believe.

Why should the Bible have to contain a fossil record? Do you know what a Leviathan was? The Bible has these living in the sea and some on the land. Could these be in the fossil record and be called by a different "scientific" name today?

Why is it important for a complete fossil record? Because people are teaching today that this is the only acceptable fact taught by science. If they are going to be totally honest in their teachings they need to have 100% facts. Afterall, is that not what science demands? Being able to prove things. When there are obivious gaps ie... the missing link you spoke of. IMHO when beliefs are formed off of scientific teachings, then 100% of the facts should be there, if not there, why just have faith that science will eventually fill in these gaps. Science seems to be ever changing, things added things taken away, does peoples faith in science change with these teachings?

This Bible that I read gives me the information that God created. It lays out that the earth was created, days and nights, then atmosphere, then plant life, then animal life, then finally man. Each layed out in sequence where one would benefit the other and allow each to be able to thrive. The Bible even states that God hung the earth and the stars on nothing. Isn't that true? Best of my knowledge there are not strings attached. There are historical records and things are unearthed everyday in the middle east that does comfirm the Bible. For instance up until a few years ago, there was no proof for a man called Joseph in Egypt, well they have uncovered proof of Joseph. Pontius Pilate was at one time thought not to be real, we now know he was. There is outside proof that there was a man named Jesus Christ, that He was cruicified. The list goes on and on. If you are a man that needs facts, look. Don't believe the few things that I told you here simply because I said them. Study these things for yourself, wether or not you believe or not believe is on you. You have the option here. I can't make you or force you to do this, the information is there for your choosing. Do what you feel is best.

Thank you and others for having this conversation. I have truly enjoyed it, and I hope you have too. What ever the outcome of our individual lives may we each find the peace that we all seek. Merry Christmas!
Click to expand...

What I was getting at was that missing links are referring to "transitional fossils." The whole concept of "missing links" is from a now defunct line of thought that there is a single pathway for a species, and that there must be some sort of transition between each step. Now, genetics and more fossil findings have shown that that rather than a single path, there is actually a tree or bush of evolutionary paths, many leading to dead ends (mammoth and many other prehistoric elephant relatives, from earlier.) We don't have every transitional fossil because there are any infinite number of transitions. It simply isn't possible to have a perfect record of every creature that ever lived, for obvious reasons.


You stated various Bible archeology things that I grew up hearing and believing. I was actually raised devoutly Christian. As I got older, I realized many elements of both Christian dogma and Biblical explanations for modern discoveries simply don't add up. It isn't surprising that the Bible is correct on various historical things, as it is a document from those time periods. Herodotus was right about a lot of things, too. I feel I could say the same to you in regards to looking at the facts.

Either there is an omnipotent and omniscient being that allows suffering all over the world with only one path to ever have salvation and is sending billions and billions of men women and children to hell but "loves us," created us just as we are, controls everything that ever happens to us and knows what we will do before we do it, but then punishes us if we fail (which obviously since he is in control of everything, we were set up to do), and puts some peoples of the world (Japanese, Sub Saharan Africans, etc.) at a severe disadvantage for hearing about the one way to heaven because it was "revealed to all the peoples of the world at one time and they must have rejected it" (ludicrous, racist, makes no sense to be punishing people for a sin of their ancestors anyway) OR
it is just a desert tribe's superstitions. On that thought alone, I am convinced.

Throw in there the overwhelming geologic and astrophysical evidence that the world is far older than 6,000 or 10,000 years, and there you go. As far as revising things like "Leviathans must be dinosaurs, even though it is Hebrew for whale" and the like, one only has to see how wrong the religion has been on many many things through it's existence to see that it is constantly being reinvented to keep an air of legitimacy. Unless all the original Christians were just wrong, and only now has the faith been truly "revealed?"

I promise I am well-versed in Christianity. Even if you think my opinion on things are completely wrong, they are at the least well-informed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top