Questions, Misconceptions, Objections,..etc,

[CANADIEN]

Betsy, its too much of a stretch for you to understand it.

For me too, but I love your choice of words.

Edited September 21, 2012 by CANADIEN

[Black Dog]

That's interesting. Cite on Hebrew and KJV.

I already did and you brushed it off. Pay attention.

[g_bambino]

You are speculating big time. Cite. And explain how those translations differ.

CANADIEN provided a source already.

Perhaps you don't understand the definition of "speculate".

Regardless, you are speculating about God's plan. You admitted as much; though, I don't think you intended to.

[Guest Manny]

Not bitching about anything. Just having fun with the fact betsy keeps telling me what I think even when I have the distinct impression I think something else.

Now, if you have something to contribute on the topic, you're welcome.

I did contribute, a few times. Nobody answer me. They prefer to just keep ranting about the specs in each others eyes...

[The_Squid]

Now I'd like to hear your own side:

Blackdog, Bambino, Canadien, melanie, Squid and other evolutionists who outright reject Design or Creation.

Explain how you support your own assumptions that we exist purely by simple chance - and a long series of accidents.

There are many, many books on the subject. A good one is by Krauss called "A Univers from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing". It's quite recent.

But I don't expect that you will go and learn anything. It won't suit your belief system.

[g_bambino]

Explain how you support your own assumptions that we exist purely by simple chance - and a long series of accidents.

I never expressed such an assumption.

[dre]

Now I'd like to hear your own side:

Blackdog, Bambino, Canadien, melanie, Squid and other evolutionists who outright reject Design or Creation.

Explain how you support your own assumptions that we exist purely by simple chance - and a long series of accidents.

Not only is there a vast fossil record that shows evolution in action, but we can see it in action today.

[betsy]

Thanks for letting me know I do not believe the Universe was created by God. For years and years I thought I believed God created the Universe.

No wonder you cannot address the real issue, you have big problems with comprehension.....

betsy:

why on earth - as he described himself being a christian - does he find it so hard to accept that science comes from God, and therefore, can be used by God for whatever purpose(s) He may have, or however He may want to do so.

....or the art of slicking around just comes to you so naturally?

I hope - for your own sake - it's not the latter.

[betsy]

Not bitching about anything. Just having fun with the fact betsy keeps telling me what I think even when I have the distinct impression I think something else.

It might be nice to share that fun around with us since no one can read minds or wade inside your inner self to see that "distinct impression" you're on about!

You are in a forum - to discuss! To argue and defend!

Your writings are what we base our responses with! Not your "distinct impressions!"

You are not in a witches' coven where you can perhaps get to do your "readings!"

Edited September 22, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

Sorry, but I still have to absorb the fact I find it hard to accept that science come from God. After all, I was under the mistaken impression that I believed science (that is, in the Oxford dictionary definition, `the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experimen"), or more exactly the intellectual capacity to engage in science, is, like other intelectual capacities, part of the attributes God has given human. I even thought, and I even have a faint memory of stating it in a thread here in a distant past, that in that sense it can be said that science comes from God.

But now, you have proven to me, once again, that I didn't think what i thought I thought. So why why don't YOU tell me why I have problems accepting something I didn't even know I had problems accepting?

So why do you try to discredit what I say about the Bible and science?

You may think you're having "fun" with me Canadien....but you are actually having fun at God's expense.

[betsy]

I could have sworn there is a difference between KNOWING, through faith, that God has he ability do ANYTHING He wants - and concluding through a bad reading of one translation of the Bible (remember, it is streched OUT and streched FORTH, not streched) that God inspired the writers of one translation to include words which, when misread later would appear to match an anslogy used by scientists when talking about a recent discovery.

But as usual, you will in due time inform me that I do not believe there is a difference between the two. And then, of course, you will expect me to explain how come I don't believe something I didn't know I don't believe.

Yoohoo, Canadien.....I opened up the Bible this morning and looks like God's got a message for you.

Romans 1:20

(KJV)

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

My Bible study notes state: COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD:

The argument from cause and effect is one logical argument for the existence of God. As everything that exists must have an adequate cause, so an all-powerful and intelligent God is an adequate cause to explain the universe. The Scripture identifies that "cause" as the creative power of God.

Boy....don't you find it so timely "accidental" that this verse - which I read when I opened the Bible this morning - happens to be appropriate for this debacle I'm having with a very confused christian named, Canadien? Feels like He's joining the discussion.

Edited September 22, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

Not bitching about anything. Just having fun with the fact betsy keeps telling me what I think even when I have the distinct impression I think something else.

Now, if you have something to contribute on the topic, you're welcome.

Manny did contribute something very important to the topic. As a reader who obviously follows the discussion....he emphasizes that your message is coming across as convoluted! You keep refusing to explain clearly, which is pathetic. The onus is on you to make us understand what you're on about!

What exactly is your problem with my point? Explain.

There is no discussion if we don't get you.

If you keep refusing to explain, then we can say to you: "if you have something to contribute on the topic, you're welcome."

Edited September 22, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

There are many, many books on the subject. A good one is by Krauss called "A Univers from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing". It's quite recent.

But I don't expect that you will go and learn anything. It won't suit your belief system.

Obviously you've read that book and understood it, otherwise you wouldn't be recommending it, right?

I read the Bible and I gave you the parts in that Book that supports my arguments. I was specific.

I expect the same from all of you guys who are trying to defend your besieged fort - that precariously teethers on one assumption after another after another - thanks to the secularism around us that keeps propping it up with prosthetics!

So, give me the gist of it! You should know the keywords to google it up and bring them here! Surely there has to be something out there to hold up as an evidence?

So explain, what's in that book you recommended that gives evidence to support your assumption that origin is caused by all these accidents!

Be specific!

Edited September 22, 2012 by betsy

[CANADIEN]

Not only is there a vast fossil record that shows evolution in action, but we can see it in action today.

Indeed. There is nothing incompatible between evolution and Creation.

[betsy]

Not only is there a vast fossil record that shows evolution in action, but we can see it in action today.

We're not talking about that leaky fossil record right now. Save it for later. We're talking about the beginning of it all!

You say the beginning is the cause of an accident. Give me your empirical evidence to support that assumption.

Edited September 22, 2012 by betsy

[CANADIEN]

No wonder you cannot address the real issue, you have big problems with comprehension.....

To paraphrase you, the issue, which is the fact there is no descrption of the way the Universe extends in the Bible, has been addressed. The incomprehension is yours - unless of course, you know better than I what I address and do not address.

....or the art of slicking around just comes to you so naturally?

I'll admit it. I am very good at slicking around explaining why I have a problem with something I have no problem with, namely the fact that science (the scientific process) is one of the intellectual capacities given tuo us by God.

You think I have a problem with this, I KNOW I have no problem with this.

I'll also slick around every time I'm ask to explain why I saw Elvis exiting a flying saucer three nights ago (hint: I didn't see Elvis exiting a flying saucer three nights ago ).

Edited September 22, 2012 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

We're not talking about that leaky fossil record right now. Save it for later. We're talking about the beginning of it all!

You say the beginning is the cause of an accident. Give me your empirical evidence to support that assumption.

Nope, we are talking about whether or not the expension of the Universe is described in the Bbile.

BTW, news to you. You do not decide, or dictate what people talk about in this thread. Stick to deciding for me what I think and what I have problems with, will you?

[CANADIEN]

Yoohoo, Canadien.....I opened up the Bible this morning and looks like God's got a message for you.

My Bible study notes state: COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD:

The argument from cause and effect is one logical argument for the existence of God. As everything that exists must have an adequate cause, so an all-powerful and intelligent God is an adequate cause to explain the universe. The Scripture identifies that "cause" as the creative power of God.

Boy....don't you find it so timely "accidental" that this verse - which I read when I opened the Bible this morning - happens to be appropriate for this debacle I'm having with a very confused christian named, Canadien? Feels like He's joining the discussion.

I don't think it is accidental that you found this verse in the Bible this morning. I think you went looking for it. Difference.

Interestingly, when I opened my Bbile this morning, it was on a passage about Wisdom working through the ages. A reminder of what I KNOW through faith - that the Universe is God's creation.

But then, of course, you know better than me that I confused about it.

[CANADIEN]

What exactly is your problem with my point? Explain.

The assumption that the Bible provides a description of the way the Universe expends is based on one translation, in one language, when other translations use words that do not have the exact same meaning...

If that,s the case, the next logical step is that God inspired the writers of one translation of the Bible to include certain knowledge, but that He didn't do so for other translations - which is non-sense...

Scientists who have described the metric expansion of space have used comparisons such as an expanding rubber ballon and a rising raisin bread, which is not quite the same as streching out like a tent...

The verbs to stretch OUT and to strech FORTH, the actual verbs used in the KJV, are not same verbs as to stretch - at least according to the Oxford dictionary...

Apparently, that's not enough of an explanation. But then, I begin to suspect that the only words that would qualify as an explanation would be "Betsy is right".

[CANADIEN]

So why do you try to discredit what I say about the Bible and science?

I'd think most people would know that my disagreement is with your reading of the Bible, I'd also think they would notice that I have said, more than one time, that I KNOW through faith God exists and is the Creator of the Universe, that and He tells so through the Bible. And I'd think they would notice that I do not believe His message in the Bible is about the way the Universe he created works, or that His Word includes a scientific valid description of the Universe.

I am sure many here do not agree with me on all or any of these things. Only one person keeps stating that i say, or mean, something different.

You may think you're having "fun" with me Canadien....but you are actually having fun at God's expense.

I won't dignify this with an answer.

Edited September 22, 2012 by CANADIEN

[cybercoma]

So why do you try to discredit what I say about the Bible and science?

Because you're so wrong that even other Christians shake their heads at your arguments.

[cybercoma]

We're not talking about that leaky fossil record right now. Save it for later. We're talking about the beginning of it all!

You say the beginning is the cause of an accident. Give me your empirical evidence to support that assumption.

The beginning of life hasn't been empirically verified yet. That doesn't mean that God is in the gaps, as you'll undoubtedly argue.

[CANADIEN]

The beginning of life hasn't been empirically verified yet. That doesn't mean that God is in the gaps, as you'll undoubtedly argue.

Interesting that somehow means talking about whether or not certain passages of the Bible describe something found through science turns into a discussion on the origin of the Universe, but at the same time one is not to mention evolution. Guess we know who sets the parameters of what can and cannot be mentioned...

But I digress... Interesting, the "God is in the gaps" argument. Intersting, because one it is simplistic (if something in the physical realm cannot be explained... yet, that proves that God exists). And second, because then it opens the door wide to the argument that each new discovery proves that God doesn't exist.

I do not base my knowedge of the existence of God on the fact there are things science have not found an answer to yet. Many of the gaps will be filled - God will still be.

Edited September 22, 2012 by CANADIEN

[betsy]

To paraphrase you, the issue, which is the fact there is no descrption of the way the Universe extends in the Bible, has been addressed. The incomprehension is yours - unless of course, you know better than I what I address and do not address.

That's not a fact. That's only your own opinion.

I'll admit it. I am very good at slicking around explaining why I have a problem with something I have no problem with, namely the fact that science (the scientific process) is one of the intellectual capacities given tuo us by God.

Well?

Then, why do you have a prolem accepting that it's been given for a purpose - and that it can be used by God in any way or any how He wants to?

You think I have a problem with this, I KNOW I have no problem with this.

You only think you know. Thinking you know, is part of your confusion!

But yes, you do have a problem. You're not consistent. Even your simple self-profess christian identity is not compatible with your reasonings and attitude towards the Bible.

Your rationale is convoluted - no wonder I mistook you for a New Atheist before! Manny is as confused as me about you by the looks of it! That's your big problem!

I'll also slick around every time I'm ask to explain why I saw Elvis exiting a flying saucer three nights ago (hint: I didn't see Elvis exiting a flying saucer three nights ago ).

I wasn't asking you about Elvis. Don't compare God to Elvis.

Edited September 23, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

You seem to place science as equal to God in stature.

Both, separately, have their own specific domain?

That God wouldn't dare meddle with science.....as science wouldn't even dream about messing with the supernatural?