Scott Mayers Posted January 24, 2018 Report Posted January 24, 2018 31 minutes ago, ?Impact said: Support is not the correct term here. Yes, some creationists have retold their fairy tales in a manner that adopts them to the big bang theory, but science does not support creation nonsense because there is zero evidence. There is a purposeful 'blurr' in the politics that keep the peace by what I referred to as "support" here. What most do not know is the history and cross reference between the science, philosophy and politics regarding scientific theory because most people cannot handle the reality. While many of us can handle a nihilistic reality without the fear of falling into the depression that reality means when understanding nature, there is still a real problem should we abandon the concerns of those supporting religious beliefs regardless of how I or you may dislike it. I used to think differently until I studied enough of history, science and politics and noticed that there IS a risk should society accept the truth without care and consideration. Maybe we may be able to find a means in the future to resolve the concerns about irrational thought. But we are not yet even able to handle the kind of changes today regarding the present witch hunts of various cult-like thinking that even the non-religious community is adapting today BY even many scientifically 'credible' people. So I tend to at least understand the reason why those like Betty here are struggling without holding prejudice against her personally for any apparent irrationality. She is NOT irrational in light of how many outside of her views still do not see where they too ARE 'religious' in their own arrogant hypocritical ways. Our political "Multicultural" system is one that I see as just a repeat of ancient history playing out. For example, our ancestors of Egypt were NOT polytheistic irrationals as most interpret them today. To me this is proof that to in another 4000 years (if we should still exist), others will look back at our time and interpret us inappropriately as 'polytheistic' idiots as they adopt a new religion based on our scientific heroes as religious profits and gods by then. Quote
Scott Mayers Posted January 24, 2018 Report Posted January 24, 2018 2 hours ago, betsy said: How can something that the science community deem valid, not "scientific? The original scriptures of most religions did NOT write their works with any specific religion in mind. Only re-editing by many political interests have co-opted their secular history and turned it into religions, usually favoring specific people with absurd bias. Genesis, for instance, was NOT a specific set of stories about a specific group of people but a collection of secular knowledge written in a way that summarized their intellectual interpretations of ALL peoples then without bias against any specific beliefs. So to them, the bible summarized the secular knowledge (including science) of what they knew at the time, though much of it is now distorted to 'fit' with the evolving editing teams of people wanting to alter it to their political ends. So just because today's scientists hold a conventional explanation in common today, it does not mean it is correct. Truth is not 'democratic'. Unless you know the history of Steady State theory and what it is, you won't know that today's Big Bang theory has come full circle to 'agree' with the Steady State theory. What happens in institutes is that they CONSERVE credit to the collection of their intellects to a point that they cannot UNDO it without risking the credibility of the institute of science itself. It is POLITICAL. The quotes about the Big Bang theory you quoted above is FOR a naive audience like yourself to argue against the religious views you hold, NOT to discredit other scientific explanations. I believe they are mistaken to use that argument precisely because it DOESN'T remove doubt by those like yourself. Rather, you EVOLVE to adapt the views accepted by reinterpreting to support your view in defeat of their intent to dispel it. Quote 2 hours ago, betsy said: Your opinion as an atheist, is without any basis. You're in denial. And yes, it does support Creation - I'm glad you at least, acknowledge that. That's the thing I've been saying all along about the National Academy of Sciences' view on "THEISTIC evolution." If I now tell you that I am God, would you now 'deny' me? What would you call yourself if you lack reason to believe in me? Quote
?Impact Posted January 24, 2018 Report Posted January 24, 2018 (edited) 44 minutes ago, Scott Mayers said: there is still a real problem should we abandon the concerns of those supporting religious beliefs From a societal standpoint, I support freedom of religion (as expressed in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms). Regardless of what I think of other peoples opinions on matters outside of science, I agree that they are entitled to those opinions and to express them freely in society as long as they do not infringe on other peoples rights. Way too often we have people trying to infringe on others with their justification that "my religion is better than your religion", or "my religion is better than no religion" and we have to recognize that they have then exceeded the bounds of freedom of religion because they are infringing on others. While I think that society would be better off without any of the religious bunk, history has demonstrated that trying to take it away has resulted in terrible atrocities. In nature we have many examples of family and larger units cooperating for mutual benefit, and we also have many examples of symbiotic relationships between different species. Natural selection is what has given us our morals, and life itself is its own reward. We do not have to fear a nihilistic reality because we do have purpose based on those morals that have been developed and passed down through countless generations. There is no more validity of purpose being defined by some omniscient being than there is of purpose being developed by man. Just like we ask where God came from, it is valid to ask why did he create that purpose; was it just some cruel joke to entertain him? 14 minutes ago, Scott Mayers said: a collection of secular knowledge written in a way that summarized their intellectual interpretations of ALL peoples then without bias against any specific beliefs. I agree except for the ALL. There is much knowledge that ancient civilizations had that has not been passed down through the Bible, but through other texts, traditions, and oral history. Edited January 24, 2018 by ?Impact Quote
Scott Mayers Posted January 24, 2018 Report Posted January 24, 2018 @ ?Impact Yes I agree. To the "ALL" I meant the general population particularly of the Middle East with respect to the Judaeo-Christian Bible only. There is as much history (and records of it) missing and, like Natural Selection, most of it is screened out just as more species die off than get passed on. Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 On 1/24/2018 at 11:18 AM, Omni said: Nope. We read the Lord's Prayer every day in school. It was my nose that led me out of it. Thank you nose. Be that as it may .... Did your textbooks that covered theories regarding how the universe came into existence include any reference to the remote possibility that an intelligent being may have created the universe ? Fact is most Government approved indoctrination centers are quite hostile to the notion that "God" exist or ever did anything. Quote
?Impact Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 5 minutes ago, John Prewett said: Be that as it may .... Did your textbooks that covered theories regarding how the universe came into existence include any reference to the remote possibility that an intelligent being may have created the universe ? Fact is most Government approved indoctrination centers are quite hostile to the notion that "God" exist or ever did anything. My science textbooks also didn't have the equally remote possibility that Pinocchio was a real boy, we covered that in fictional literature. Quote
Omni Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 5 minutes ago, John Prewett said: Be that as it may .... Did your textbooks that covered theories regarding how the universe came into existence include any reference to the remote possibility that an intelligent being may have created the universe ? Fact is most Government approved indoctrination centers are quite hostile to the notion that "God" exist or ever did anything. As I already pointed out, we read the lord's prayer, but then we went on to actual science. The education system had advance luckily for us even by that time which was a while ago. Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 "Seeing is believing" The Bible end of era scenario is coming true before our eyes OT predicted Israel would be dispersed and regathered. It happened. OT predicted "great power" to "remote north" would lead invasion of Israel. Russia poised to do it.Revelation 13->forward predicts an end of era One World Government [that the Beast will rule over]. "Sovereign" nations now being turned into failed states in order to bring about creation of the predicted One World Government. The entity that perfectly and uniquely fits the specification of the Great Whore is out in open. The G.W. has been seen and is seen by millions for centuries. Two men who perfectly and uniquely fit the specifications of the two Beast of Rev 13 now live. Both Beasts of Revelation 13 have famous names. The subordinate Beast is out in the open. The supreme Beast [who received "fatal appearing head wound"] is waiting in the wings. The supreme Beast that "was + is not + is to come" will "amaze the world" when he publicly emerges. Within past few decades technology required for the "marking" ["cashless society"] has been created. Within past few decades the technology needed to focus whole world attention on one man at one time has come into being. Within past few decades "Global problems" [supporting call for One World Government] came to be seen by the masses. Increasingly Atheist and Bible scorners will be seen to be willfully blind. Quote
?Impact Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 7 minutes ago, John Prewett said: "Seeing is believing" The Bible end of era scenario is coming true before our eyes ...Increasingly Atheist and Bible scorners will be seen to be willfully blind. We have heard the story of the apocalypse before, the world was supposed to end the following dates, with those who predicted it. Sorry, but that story is getting stale. 66–70 Simon bar Giora, Jewish Essenes 365 Hilary of Poitiers 375–400 Martin of Tours 500 Hippolytus of Rome, Sextus Julius Africanus, Irenaeus 793-04-06 Beatus of Liébana 800 Sextus Julius Africanus 799–806 Gregory of Tours 848 Thiota 992–995 Various Christians 1000-01-01 Pope Sylvester II 1033 Various Christians 1200–1260 Joachim of Fiore 1284 Pope Innocent III 1290 1335 Joachimites 1346–1351 Various Europeans 1370 Jean de Roquetaillade 1378 Arnaldus de Villa Nova 1504 Sandro Botticelli 1524-02-01 London astrologers 1524-02-20 Johannes Stöffler 1524–1526 Thomas Müntzer 1528-05-27 Hans Hut 1528 Johannes Stöffler 1533-10-19 Michael Stifel 1533 Melchior Hoffman 1534-04-05 Jan Matthys 1555 Pierre d'Ailly 1585 Michael Servetus 1588 Regiomontanus 1600 Martin Luther 1624-02-01 London astrologers 1648 Sabbatai Zevi 1651 Unknown author from Lübeck, Germany 1654 Helisaeus Roeslin 1656 Christopher Columbus 1655–1657 Fifth Monarchists 1658 Christopher Columbus 1660 Joseph Mede 1666 Sabbatai Zevi Fifth Monarchists 1673 William Aspinwall 1688 John Napier 1689 Pierre Jurieu 1694 John Mason Johann Heinrich Alsted Johann Jacob Zimmermann 1697 Cotton Mather 1700 John Napier Henry Archer 1705–1708 Camisards 1716 Cotton Mather 1719-04-05 Jacob Bernoulli 1700–1734 Nicholas of Cusa 1736-10-16 William Whiston 1736 Cotton Mather 1757 Emanuel Swedenborg 1780-05-19 Connecticut General Assembly members, New Englanders 1789 Pierre d'Ailly 1792 1794 Shakers 1795-11-19 Nathaniel Brassey Halhed 1793–1795 Richard Brothers 1805 Christopher Love 1806 Mary Bateman 1814-10-19 Joanna Southcott 1836 Johann Albrecht Bengel 1836 John Wesley 1843 Apr 28 1843 Dec 31 Millerites 1843 Harriet Livermore 1844-03-21 William Miller 1844-10-22 Millerites 1847-08-07 George Rapp 1847 Harriet Livermore 1853–1856 Various 1862 John Cumming Joseph Morris 1863 John Wroe 1873 Jonas Wendell 1874 Charles Taze Russell 1875-1925 Wilford Woodruff 1881 Mother Shipton (attrib.) 1890 Wovoka 1901 Catholic Apostolic Church 1910 Camille Flammarion 1892–1911 Charles Piazzi Smyth 1914 Charles Taze Russell 1915 John Chilembwe 1918 International Bible Students Association 1920 International Bible Students Association 1925-02-13 Margaret Rowen 1926 Spencer Perceval 1935-09-01 Wilbur Glenn Voliva 1936 Herbert W. Armstrong 1941 Jehovah's Witnesses 1943 Herbert W. Armstrong 1947 John Ballou Newbrough 1954-12-21 Dorothy Martin 1959-04-22 Florence Houteff 1962-02-04 Jeane Dixon, various Indian astrologers 1967-08-20 George Van Tassel 1967 Jim Jones 1969-08-09 George Williams 1969 Charles Manson 1972 Herbert W. Armstrong 1974-01-01 David Berg 1975 Herbert W. Armstrong Jehovah's Witnesses 1976 Brahma Kumaris 1977 John Wroe William M. Branham 1980 Leland Jensen 1981 Chuck Smith 1982 Apr–Jun Tara Centers 1982-03-10 John Gribbin, Stephen Plagemann 1982-06-21 Benjamin Creme 1982 Pat Robertson 1985 Lester Sumrall 1986-04-29 Leland Jensen 1987-08-17 José Argüelles 1988 Sep 11–13, Oct 3 Edgar C. Whisenant 1989-09-30 Edgar C. Whisenant 1990-04-23 Elizabeth Clare Prophet 1991-09-09 Menachem Mendel Schneerson 1991 Louis Farrakhan 1992-09-28 Rollen Stewart 1992-10-28 Lee Jang Rim (이장림 or 李長林) 1993 David Berg 1994-05-02 Neal Chase 1994 Sep 6/29, Oct 2 Harold Camping 1995-03-31 Harold Camping 1996-12-17 Sheldan Nidle 1997-03-26 Marshall Applewhite 1997-08-10 Aggai 1997-10-23 James Ussher 1998-03-31 Chen Tao (陳恆明) 1999-07-01 Nostradamus 1999-08-18 The Amazing Criswell 1999-09-11 Philip Berg 1999 Charles Berlitz Hon-Ming Chen James Gordon Lindsay Timothy Dwight IV Nazim Al-Haqqani 2000-01-01 Various Credonia Mwerinde, Joseph Kibweteere Jerry Falwell Tim LaHaye, Jerry B. Jenkins 2000-04-06 James Harmston 2000-05-05 Nuwaubian Nation 2000 Peter Olivi Isaac Newton Ruth Montgomery Edgar Cayce Sun Myung Moon Ed Dobson Lester Sumrall Jonathan Edwards 2001 Tynnetta Muhammad 2003-05-27 Nancy Lieder 2003 Oct 30–Nov 29 Aum Shinrikyo 2006-09-12 House of Yahweh 2007-04-29 Pat Robertson 2010 Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn 2011-05-21 Harold Camping 2011-09-29 Ronald Weinland 2011-10-21 Harold Camping 2011 Aug–Oct Various 2012-05-27 Ronald Weinland 2012-06-30 José Luis de Jesús 2012-12-21 Various 2013-08-23 Grigori Rasputin 2014 Apr – 2015 Sep John Hagee and Mark Biltz 2017 Sep 23 – Oct 25 David Meade 1 Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 16 minutes ago, ?Impact said: My science textbooks also didn't have the equally remote possibility that Pinocchio was a real boy, we covered that in fictional literature. Your equating of story such as Pinoccio with bible accounts just shows me you are a stupid bigot. Have a nice day, JP Quote
Omni Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 17 minutes ago, ?Impact said: My science textbooks also didn't have the equally remote possibility that Pinocchio was a real boy, we covered that in fictional literature. I think that Pinocchio should be given equal credit as any of those bible figures. The best he could do was make his nose grow but those others could make a camel fit a camel fit through the eye of a needle! Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, ?Impact said: We have heard the story of the apocalypse before, the world was supposed to end the following dates, with those who predicted it. Sorry, but that story is getting stale. 66–70 Simon bar Giora, Jewish Essenes 365 Hilary of Poitiers 375–400 Martin of Tours 500 Hippolytus of Rome, Sextus Julius Africanus, Irenaeus 793-04-06 Beatus of Liébana 800 Sextus Julius Africanus 799–806 Gregory of Tours 848 Thiota 992–995 Various Christians 1000-01-01 Pope Sylvester II 1033 Various Christians 1200–1260 Joachim of Fiore 1284 Pope Innocent III 1290 1335 Joachimites 1346–1351 Various Europeans 1370 Jean de Roquetaillade 1378 Arnaldus de Villa Nova 1504 Sandro Botticelli 1524-02-01 London astrologers 1524-02-20 Johannes Stöffler 1524–1526 Thomas Müntzer 1528-05-27 Hans Hut 1528 Johannes Stöffler 1533-10-19 Michael Stifel 1533 Melchior Hoffman 1534-04-05 Jan Matthys 1555 Pierre d'Ailly 1585 Michael Servetus 1588 Regiomontanus 1600 Martin Luther 1624-02-01 London astrologers 1648 Sabbatai Zevi 1651 Unknown author from Lübeck, Germany 1654 Helisaeus Roeslin 1656 Christopher Columbus 1655–1657 Fifth Monarchists 1658 Christopher Columbus 1660 Joseph Mede 1666 Sabbatai Zevi Fifth Monarchists 1673 William Aspinwall 1688 John Napier 1689 Pierre Jurieu 1694 John Mason Johann Heinrich Alsted Johann Jacob Zimmermann 1697 Cotton Mather 1700 John Napier Henry Archer 1705–1708 Camisards 1716 Cotton Mather 1719-04-05 Jacob Bernoulli 1700–1734 Nicholas of Cusa 1736-10-16 William Whiston 1736 Cotton Mather 1757 Emanuel Swedenborg 1780-05-19 Connecticut General Assembly members, New Englanders 1789 Pierre d'Ailly 1792 1794 Shakers 1795-11-19 Nathaniel Brassey Halhed 1793–1795 Richard Brothers 1805 Christopher Love 1806 Mary Bateman 1814-10-19 Joanna Southcott 1836 Johann Albrecht Bengel 1836 John Wesley 1843 Apr 28 1843 Dec 31 Millerites 1843 Harriet Livermore 1844-03-21 William Miller 1844-10-22 Millerites 1847-08-07 George Rapp 1847 Harriet Livermore 1853–1856 Various 1862 John Cumming Joseph Morris 1863 John Wroe 1873 Jonas Wendell 1874 Charles Taze Russell 1875-1925 Wilford Woodruff 1881 Mother Shipton (attrib.) 1890 Wovoka 1901 Catholic Apostolic Church 1910 Camille Flammarion 1892–1911 Charles Piazzi Smyth 1914 Charles Taze Russell 1915 John Chilembwe 1918 International Bible Students Association 1920 International Bible Students Association 1925-02-13 Margaret Rowen 1926 Spencer Perceval 1935-09-01 Wilbur Glenn Voliva 1936 Herbert W. Armstrong 1941 Jehovah's Witnesses 1943 Herbert W. Armstrong 1947 John Ballou Newbrough 1954-12-21 Dorothy Martin 1959-04-22 Florence Houteff 1962-02-04 Jeane Dixon, various Indian astrologers 1967-08-20 George Van Tassel 1967 Jim Jones 1969-08-09 George Williams 1969 Charles Manson 1972 Herbert W. Armstrong 1974-01-01 David Berg 1975 Herbert W. Armstrong Jehovah's Witnesses 1976 Brahma Kumaris 1977 John Wroe William M. Branham 1980 Leland Jensen 1981 Chuck Smith 1982 Apr–Jun Tara Centers 1982-03-10 John Gribbin, Stephen Plagemann 1982-06-21 Benjamin Creme 1982 Pat Robertson 1985 Lester Sumrall 1986-04-29 Leland Jensen 1987-08-17 José Argüelles 1988 Sep 11–13, Oct 3 Edgar C. Whisenant 1989-09-30 Edgar C. Whisenant 1990-04-23 Elizabeth Clare Prophet 1991-09-09 Menachem Mendel Schneerson 1991 Louis Farrakhan 1992-09-28 Rollen Stewart 1992-10-28 Lee Jang Rim (이장림 or 李長林) 1993 David Berg 1994-05-02 Neal Chase 1994 Sep 6/29, Oct 2 Harold Camping 1995-03-31 Harold Camping 1996-12-17 Sheldan Nidle 1997-03-26 Marshall Applewhite 1997-08-10 Aggai 1997-10-23 James Ussher 1998-03-31 Chen Tao (陳恆明) 1999-07-01 Nostradamus 1999-08-18 The Amazing Criswell 1999-09-11 Philip Berg 1999 Charles Berlitz Hon-Ming Chen James Gordon Lindsay Timothy Dwight IV Nazim Al-Haqqani 2000-01-01 Various Credonia Mwerinde, Joseph Kibweteere Jerry Falwell Tim LaHaye, Jerry B. Jenkins 2000-04-06 James Harmston 2000-05-05 Nuwaubian Nation 2000 Peter Olivi Isaac Newton Ruth Montgomery Edgar Cayce Sun Myung Moon Ed Dobson Lester Sumrall Jonathan Edwards 2001 Tynnetta Muhammad 2003-05-27 Nancy Lieder 2003 Oct 30–Nov 29 Aum Shinrikyo 2006-09-12 House of Yahweh 2007-04-29 Pat Robertson 2010 Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn 2011-05-21 Harold Camping 2011-09-29 Ronald Weinland 2011-10-21 Harold Camping 2011 Aug–Oct Various 2012-05-27 Ronald Weinland 2012-06-30 José Luis de Jesús 2012-12-21 Various 2013-08-23 Grigori Rasputin 2014 Apr – 2015 Sep John Hagee and Mark Biltz 2017 Sep 23 – Oct 25 David Meade Most you list lived before (for instance) the rebirth of Israel. Before the technology for the "marking" was invented. Before technology enabling focus of the world to be on one man at one time came in existence. RIGHT NOW all with eyes can see that the "sovereign" nations are being brought down ... as they must be brought down in order for the cashless One World Government to be created. Currently you are just a pathetic willfully blind man Edited January 25, 2018 by John Prewett Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 That nearly 2000 years ago, the Revelation predicted a "marking" enabling control of "buying and selling" of billions of people world wide is a sign that the Revelation is from God as it claims it is. For centuries skeptics claimed this proved the bible false, because they deemed impossible for any "mark" to control buying and selling all over the world. Today, as many are aware of, technology exist to make literal "marking" completely feasible I wonder how anyone can fail to see that the "micro-chip" implant allowing government to monitor and control world wide commerce, is not only feasible, it is inevitable. The Revelation has been conveying blessing [as it promises to do] past, present and future. Satan wants people to think the Revelation is all in the past or just fiction. Quote
Omni Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, John Prewett said: Satan wants people to think the Revelation is all in the past or just fiction. So you are on first person speaking terms with god and satan? wow! Tell'em both to go to hell for me will ya. Oh yeah I forgot one of 'ems already there. Right then. Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, Omni said: So you are on first person speaking terms with god and satan? wow! Tell'em both to go to hell for me will ya. Oh yeah I forgot one of 'ems already there. Right then. Your current gross ignorance of God, Satan and the value of the Revelation is noted. Quote
Omni Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, John Prewett said: Your current gross ignorance of God, Satan and the value of the Revelation is noted. That's good, and I remind you I came by that ignorance fully intentionally. Especially after experiencing the horrors that religion has fraught in this world. Quote
?Impact Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 16 minutes ago, John Prewett said: Most you list lived before (for instance) the rebirth of Israel. I count 20 dates after 2000 alone, made by many people. Yes, Christians have been at this predicting the end of the world for a long time so having a lot of dates is not surprising. The point is that they have all failed to come true. I didn't bother to add future dates because of course I can't say they didn't come true yet, but here are some for your pleasure: You will note that some of them were made by people long dead. 2020 Jeane Dixon 2021 F. Kenton Beshore 2026 Messiah Foundation International 2060 Isaac Newton 2129 Said Nursî 2239 Talmud, Orthodox Judaism 2280 Rashad Khalifa 16 minutes ago, John Prewett said: Currently you are just a pathetic willfully blind man Your pejoratives add so much maturity to the debate, perhaps you could debate Donald Trump on his own terms. 1 Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 The Hebrew scripture predicted the dispersal and regathering of Israel. It happed. Many millions see that the very existence of modern Israel is evidence for the God of the Bible. All denying this fulfillment is EVIDENCE are dishonest. Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 2000 years ago the Revelation predicted there would come a day when financial transactions all over the world could be monitored and controlled. Just within past 50 or so years technology making that prediction INEVITABLE ("cashless society") came into existence. All denying this fulfillment is EVIDENCE are dishonest. Quote
John Prewett Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 Within past 50 year, modern science has uncovered a vast amount of information about living creatures that was unknown to the Darwin era. Knowledge of DNA alone makes 'blind chance' evolution implausible. An intelligent designer is the ONLY rational explanation for living creatures. Naturally, many remain in denial. Quote
betsy Posted January 25, 2018 Author Report Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 17 hours ago, ?Impact said: Support is not the correct term here. Yes, some creationists have retold their fairy tales in a manner that adopts them to the big bang theory, but science does not support creation nonsense because there is zero evidence. You haven't been reading, or you're simply disregarding what was given. Sounds like you're simply repeating a mantra (more so to convince yourself). I'm not going to bother trying to discuss with what seems to have turned into a brickwall. That usually happens with some atheists when faced with the NAS fact about its stance on Theistic Evolution, you know. Blinders automatically come down. They get into........ ........... DEAF-con mode. I'll be ignoring your posts until you've got something that's worth responding to. Edited January 25, 2018 by betsy Quote
betsy Posted January 25, 2018 Author Report Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 16 hours ago, Scott Mayers said: The original scriptures of most religions did NOT write their works with any specific religion in mind. Only re-editing by many political interests have co-opted their secular history and turned it into religions, usually favoring specific people with absurd bias. Genesis, for instance, was NOT a specific set of stories about a specific group of people but a collection of secular knowledge written in a way that summarized their intellectual interpretations of ALL peoples then without bias against any specific beliefs. So to them, the bible summarized the secular knowledge (including science) of what they knew at the time, though much of it is now distorted to 'fit' with the evolving editing teams of people wanting to alter it to their political ends. So just because today's scientists hold a conventional explanation in common today, it does not mean it is correct. Truth is not 'democratic'. Unless you know the history of Steady State theory and what it is, you won't know that today's Big Bang theory has come full circle to 'agree' with the Steady State theory. What happens in institutes is that they CONSERVE credit to the collection of their intellects to a point that they cannot UNDO it without risking the credibility of the institute of science itself. It is POLITICAL. The quotes about the Big Bang theory you quoted above is FOR a naive audience like yourself to argue against the religious views you hold, NOT to discredit other scientific explanations. I believe they are mistaken to use that argument precisely because it DOESN'T remove doubt by those like yourself. Rather, you EVOLVE to adapt the views accepted by reinterpreting to support your view in defeat of their intent to dispel it. If I now tell you that I am God, would you now 'deny' me? What would you call yourself if you lack reason to believe in me? IRRELEVANT! There are many theories being given. That's nothing new. As far as I know, according to NASA's faq section (the space agency) - the Big Bang is still it! The FAQ section is for the public - things are explained in "layman's terms." The section on the Big Bang faq wasn't in answer to a religious query - so, there you go. You're dead wrong! That's one thing about some atheists, you know - they don't want anything that smells like, or gives a hint to the possibility of a God. You said it yourself - the reason you reject the Big Bang! You said... Quote I'm atheist. The 'Big Bang' is NOT actually appropriately 'scientific' in my opinion precisely because it does support at minimal a Deistic interpretation..... See? If anything does support even just a MINIMAL deistic interpretation (like the Big Bang)......alarms go off! Blinders automatically come down.....atheists like you get into DEAF-CON mode! That's why I keep saying.......atheists are forced to be close-minded. They cannot afford to accept the POSSIBILITY of God's existence, even if science says it so. They cannot afford to be open-minded. That's the reason why when push comes to shove.....they can't give any rational rebuttals. The mouthy, new atheists in forums are all simply loud bravado, and hot air! We're not all scientists here, you know. I highly doubt you are. That's one more thing with some atheists - they all think they are scientists! I think some actually believe their own make-believe! They seem to be lost in another world.....that they think their opinion - without anything to support it - is worth anything in a discussion such as this issue. Like as if a sensible person on planet earth can't see through all the bs! That's another thing! They don't usually give their sources voluntarily. You gotta pry it out of them, too! If they do give their sources, I'd found that it pays off for me to read what they quoted from. It usually backfires on them. I've used atheists' given sources against them in a lot of my discussions over the years. Whatever dubious so-called "scientific" sources you're mining from......it lacks credibility.... if it goes against the NAS and NASA. Until NASA changes their FAQ story about the Big Bang - I'll take their word when it comes to that, thank you. I say read the NAS statement, and try to understand it. Lol: if you tell me you're God....I'll not only deny you.....I'll also say you need psychiatric help! That, only shows, you're not getting the rational argument given in this thread. It's simply sailing over your head. Kindly do your homework, and read all my posts, starting with the OP. ***Hint: corroborating evidence(s). To be fair, I'll have to treat you like Impact - since you both seem to have come from the same mould. I'm not shooting the breeze here with anyone.....I'll be ignoring your posts until you've got something worth responding to. Edited January 25, 2018 by betsy Quote
?Impact Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 3 hours ago, betsy said: You haven't been reading, or you're simply disregarding what was given. Sounds like you're simply repeating a mantra (more so to convince yourself). I'm not going to bother trying to discuss with what seems to have turned into a brickwall. That usually happens with some atheists when faced with the NAS fact about its stance on Theistic Evolution, you know. Blinders automatically come down. They get into........ ........... DEAF-con mode. I'll be ignoring your posts until you've got something that's worth responding to. Cool, in lieu of providing evidence you also turn to pejoratives. Quote
blackbird Posted January 25, 2018 Report Posted January 25, 2018 On 1/24/2018 at 8:53 AM, ?Impact said: Support is not the correct term here. Yes, some creationists have retold their fairy tales in a manner that adopts them to the big bang theory, but science does not support creation nonsense because there is zero evidence. Consider what God says about those who despise the Word of God, the Holy Bible. "To whom shall I speak, and give warning, that they may hear? behold, their ear is uncircumcised, and they cannot hearken: behold, the word of the LORD is unto them a reproach; they have no delight in it." Jeremiah 6:10 Appears your ear is "uncircumcised". " Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should hear the law, and the words which the LORD of hosts hath sent in his spirit by the former prophets: therefore came a great wrath from the LORD of hosts." Zechariah 7:12 So it also appears your heart is as an adamant stone. Those who set themselves against God's word are like ants who want to fight against an elephant. Makes about as much sense. Quote
Scott Mayers Posted January 26, 2018 Report Posted January 26, 2018 On 25/01/2018 at 12:11 AM, John Prewett said: Be that as it may .... Did your textbooks that covered theories regarding how the universe came into existence include any reference to the remote possibility that an intelligent being may have created the universe ? Fact is most Government approved indoctrination centers are quite hostile to the notion that "God" exist or ever did anything. Should the textbooks also include mentioning ALL religion's theories about origins? Tell me, should the textbook reserve a chapter on those who believe Aliens from other planets came here and originally planted humans here? What about Buddha? What about each and every theory by each and every claim believed true about origins? Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.