- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (seekingtruth @ Feb. 16 2008,03:48) Many listen with an ear not to understand, and examine plausibility, but to refute.
As a stand alone platitude I agree, yet this statement can be used by any of us in regards to each other's opinions and all think it appropriate to everyone other then themselves.Quote (seekingtruth @ Feb. 16 2008,03:48) Many listen with an ear not to understand, and examine plausibility, but to refute.
He who refutes everything without discrimination is a boy crying wolf. It happens that in the sphere of religious ideology I will seem to be like such a boy because there is so much I find contentious or disagreeable. I would say that in many unrelated topics we would probably have large areas of agreement. I am at the same stage I was several months ago regarding the plausibility of christian faith. I reserve a tiny chink of possibility for it, but none here has managed to grow it by the robust demonstration that I require. In turn I challenge people here to adopt more robust methods in their search for truth. Surely if a faith is weak it deserves to die. There are some here who would happily take weak people (criminals) and put them to death; I think it is only ideas that deserve that treatment.Stuart
This is somewhat in line with this thread, so I'll share it here. I recently read where someone asked if stealing a sandwich could be justifiably be punished with 10 years in prison. I think most would say no. Then in return, why would we feel that God would punish people for eternity for refusing to accept one particular belief?
Quote (kejonn @ Feb. 16 2008,06:06) This is somewhat in line with this thread, so I'll share it here. I recently read where someone asked if stealing a sandwich could be justifiably be punished with 10 years in prison. I think most would say no. Then in return, why would we feel that God would punish people for eternity for refusing to accept one particular belief?
I don't know whether in Saudi Arabia you might lose a hand for stealing a sandwich. For a non-believer that punishment would be 'forever'. I imagine such a penalty is viewed as a written judgement of allah.Stuart
Hi Stu,
We did not write it so do not take responsibility for what is written.
We just tell people as best we can what it says.
the response is over to them.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 16 2008,06:17) Hi Stu,
We did not write it so do not take responsibility for what is written.
We just tell people as best we can what it says.
the response is over to them.
But given the chance you would insist others follow it. Why did it take until 1986 for New Zealand to stop criminalising gay people? It sure wasn't humanists and buddhists putting political pressure on to retain an unjust law. To not take responsibility is to be dishonest.Stuart
Hi Stu,
No, servants are not responsible for the decisions of their Master.
Only love impels us to warn others.Quote (Stu @ Feb. 16 2008,06:22) But given the chance you would insist others follow it. Why did it take until 1986 for New Zealand to stop criminalising gay people? …. To not take responsibility is to be dishonest.
As a Christian I don't `insist' anyone does anything. I will tell them what I believe, show them what the Bible says on the matter – then it is up to them to decide.God gave us choice. It is up to the individual to make his choice and live by it. I know that no-one would be able to force me to believe anything I didn't want to.
It probably took NZ up until 1986 to de-criminalise homosexuality because up to then the majority of voters and parliamentarians were against homosexuality.
Times weren't as liberal as they are today.
If you remember, a petition against the new law, gathered by Christian groups, was handed in at parliament – and ignored.
To suggest it was down to Christians would be wrong.
Quote If God created the universe, life, mankind, etc., and the events were related to the author/authors of Genesis through some sort of divine inspiration, how was it done? E=mc2
ISAIAH 40:26
““Raise YOUR eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who is bringing forth the army of them even by number, all of whom he calls even by name. Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one [of them] is missing.”Before Einstein, there was energy, and there was matter and they were two completely separate things. Now, we realize they are the same.
The answer to your question is that God is a mathematician. And a lawmaker.
Quote (Cato @ Feb. 16 2008,00:49) Quote (seekingtruth @ Feb. 16 2008,03:48) Many listen with an ear not to understand, and examine plausibility, but to refute.
As a stand alone platitude I agree, yet this statement can be used by any of us in regards to each other's opinions and all think it appropriate to everyone other then themselves.
This was not directed at anyone. While it is true for all of us it is worse with some.Wm
Hi Heavens
Quote If you remember, a petition against the new law, gathered by Christian groups, was handed in at parliament – and ignored.
That’s my point. It took a government prepared to ignore the persistent pleadings of some christians to change this law. Previously governments had not felt able to ignore them.The Catholic church has a whole whiney ‘communications’ office dedicated to meddling. They want to have a censorial hand in what is shown on TV, what appears in museums and clearly what goes on in the privacy of the bedroom. I am not saying people here are necessarily like that, but once again it is not angostics who are objecting. The law of blasphemy is unenforceable and contrary to principles of free speech. How many believers in this forum, if polled, would say that they don’t mind if the government repeals the blasphemy law?
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Feb. 16 2008,20:20) The law of blasphemy is unenforceable and contrary to principles of free speech. How many believers in this forum, if polled, would say that they don’t mind if the government repeals the blasphemy law? 
Time to go to bed.
Quote (david @ Feb. 16 2008,11:06) Quote If God created the universe, life, mankind, etc., and the events were related to the author/authors of Genesis through some sort of divine inspiration, how was it done? E=mc2
ISAIAH 40:26
““Raise YOUR eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who is bringing forth the army of them even by number, all of whom he calls even by name. Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one [of them] is missing.”Before Einstein, there was energy, and there was matter and they were two completely separate things. Now, we realize they are the same.
The answer to your question is that God is a mathematician. And a lawmaker.
Stephen Hawking says that energy/matter is 'borrowed gravitational energy' that arose from the expansion of space-time.As an aside, 'not one of them (the stars) is missing' does rather ignore the ongoing cycles of star birth and death.
Stuart
Quote (david @ Feb. 16 2008,11:06) Quote If God created the universe, life, mankind, etc., and the events were related to the author/authors of Genesis through some sort of divine inspiration, how was it done? E=mc2
ISAIAH 40:26
““Raise YOUR eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who is bringing forth the army of them even by number, all of whom he calls even by name. Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one [of them] is missing.”Before Einstein, there was energy, and there was matter and they were two completely separate things. Now, we realize they are the same.
The answer to your question is that God is a mathematician. And a lawmaker.
David, my point exactly, I agree and only now are we starting to have the capablities to understand such. God's laws are written most accurately in math and physics. Yet how do you relate such to a person of bronze age technology with limited language to relate such ideas when most of his peers are illiterate? The answer you oversimplify just like you would for a child, it's all magic. Thus the danger of literal interpretations of scripture and my tongue in cheek title for the thread.Can I have a crack at this?
GOD said “Let there be…”
And Behold!, it was, and it was Good!…
It's on page one of the Holy Bible.
Quote (Stu @ Feb. 14 2008,17:38) It is often said that scripture could not have explained complex ideas to people not ready for them. If ancient religious writings could have conveyed simply the idea that invisibly small living things cause some diseases, and washing your hands could save your life, then it would have been simple and truly a divine revelation. We read that pigs were not to be eaten but it was already known that there are good health reasons not to eat uncured pork, so why was the equivalent statement about washing hands not included? Is it because the scriptures reflected the human knowledge of the time and do not contain anything factual that was not already known? Stuart
Actually Stu, the bible mentions in many places that the israelites were to wash themselves after becoming “unclean” in running water to purify themselves.Being unclean covered alot of areas including contact with blood, semen, the sick and dead bodies.
I realize that you probably did not realize that this was in the bible.
Leviticus 15:13
13″And when the one with a discharge is cleansed of his discharge, then(A) he shall count for himself seven days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes. And he shall bathe his body in fresh water and shall be clean.
That is only one example.
This article covers the multitude of other medical advice verses in the bible:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
