Evidence for God from Science

A child will be exposed to various views on pretty much anything, whether they like it or not, seek it or not.
I do have difficulty at times explaining to my eldest some of the more horrific occurrences in the bible.
I also have a hard time explaining some of the horrific things that happen everyday, right now, like that girl from BC that killed herself because of cyber-bullying.

snorider wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:Any view whether it be religious, atheistic, political, social, ecological will be pushed onto children. It's a fact of life get over it.

I can't let this pass, it's cynicle and outrageous.

I'm flabbergasted. If this is your attitude, our children do not have a future.
Religion CAN be seperate, JFK a devout Christian understood this.

I don't see anything to respond to here, if parents are not allowed to teach their kids anything for fear of indoctrination I fear for the future of our children.

JFK has an opinion which I do not share.

This has now come way off topic.

Dan

Danieltwotwenty wrote:Guided by an adult.

That depends, if the adult is preaching to the child that the world is 6,000 years old. That would be child abuse in my opinion. Not only is that child going to be laughed at by their peers but it will prevent the child from being accepted by a decent college if they are sincere about what they believe on Scientific tests.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:You need to go to Bible school, because you have been told multiple times that the Bible does not say the Earth was created in 6 Literal days, the word in ancient hebrew is yom which has a few different meanings depending on context.

From what I understand it took 6 days to create and the 7th was the Sabbath. Then again we have Exodus 31:14, I can understand why I hear exegesis and context so much, it's important to justify God's "divine command morality". (William Craig)
I've heard the argument: "6 days could have been thousands of years". Are you sticking with the bible or not? 6,000 years ago, the rotation of the earth was the same as it is today.
There are 68 Scientific (national and international) evidence-based studies that have shown that the Earth is around 4.5 billions years old. The bible has many fallacies when it comes to creation, for example, God created plants on the third day before sun light to feed their photosynthesis process. It also states that God created two lights, however, one light is the moon simply reflecting the Sun's natural light. Many more..
The fact that you are telling me to go to bible school in order understand the context of the "6 day creation period" is laughable.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:I was talking about baptism not circumcision.
Ok lets see one is teaching about the natural world the other is teaching about the spiritual world, now lets see what do they have in common........ TEACHING!!!!

Baptising or circumcising a child due to your religious beliefs without the child's understanding isn't right.
Now, giving your baby a tatoo/piercing would be frowned upon, but cutting a child due to "divine command morality" justifies it to be ok?

A child learning their ABCs and forcing them into a religious practice they do not yet comprehend are completely two different things.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:Pretty sure an all knowing God would know the benefits for a people without proper sanitation, like I have said multiple times in western culture it is not always a religious practice.

The benefits of circumcision weren't first realized until the 1990s.
Circumcision helps prevent sexually transmitted diseases, it would be weird for God to worry about something like that when we are expected to be in wedlock for a lifetime.



Jordan

snorider wrote:That depends, if the adult is preaching to the child that the world is 6,000 years old. That would be child abuse in my opinion. Not only is that child going to be laughed at by their peers but it will prevent the child from being accepted by a decent college if they are sincere about what they believe on Scientific tests.

The Bible does not say the age of the Earth, if someone wants to hold to a belief that the Earth is young then all power to them, the people who tease the child for his beliefs are the ones with the problem, maybe they should have been raised better to be more accepting of others beliefs.

snorider wrote:From what I understand it took 6 days to create and the 7th was the Sabbath. Then again we have Exodus 31:14, I can understand why I hear exegesis and context so much, it's important to justify God's "divine command morality". (William Craig)
I've heard the argument: "6 days could have been thousands of years". Are you sticking with the bible or not? 6,000 years ago, the rotation of the earth was the same as it is today.
There are 68 Scientific (national and international) evidence-based studies that have shown that the Earth is around 4.5 billions years old. The bible has many fallacies when it comes to creation, for example, God created plants on the third day before sun light to feed their photosynthesis process. It also states that God created two lights, however, one light is the moon simply reflecting the Sun's natural light. Many more..
The fact that you are telling me to go to bible school in order understand the context of the "6 day creation period" is laughable.

Your understanding is faulty, the Bible was not written in English, it was written for the most part in ancient Hebrew, the word Yom has many meanings...

http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/genesis.html

Hebrew word yom has three literal meanings - a 12-hour period of time (sunrise to sunset), a 24-hour period of time from sunset to sunset (the Hebrew day), and an indefinite period of time.

Please quote the text from the Bible when refering to it and we can go through it step by step and break it down because your understanding of the text is way different to mine.

If you read through the main site all your objections on creation have been answered, the Bible actually lines up with what we have learnt from science.


http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... bible.html


http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... y-age.html


http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/creation.html

snorider wrote:Baptising or circumcising a child due to your religious beliefs without the child's understanding isn't right.
Now, giving your baby a tatoo/piercing would be frowned upon, but cutting a child due to "divine command morality" justifies it to be ok?

A child learning their ABCs and forcing them into a religious practice they do not yet comprehend are completely two different things.

Like I said earlier I wasn't talking about circumcision with regards to schooling, I was talking about baptism and teaching your child about God.

snorider wrote: The benefits of circumcision weren't first realized until the 1990s.
Circumcision helps prevent sexually transmitted diseases, it would be weird for God to worry about something like that when we are expected to be in wedlock for a lifetime.

I am not sure what you are implying but you seem to be saying that circumcision only helps prevent STD's which is not the case, it has many other benefits especially when you do not have a lot of water for cleaning yourself when your in a desert enviroment.

Danieltwotwenty wrote: Your understanding is faulty, the Bible was not written in English, it was written for the most part in ancient Hebrew, the word Yom has many meanings...

http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/genesis.html

Hebrew word yom has three literal meanings - a 12-hour period of time (sunrise to sunset), a 24-hour period of time from sunset to sunset (the Hebrew day), and an indefinite period of time.

Please quote the text from the Bible when refering to it and we can go through it step by step and break it down because your understanding of the text is way different to mine.

Quote which version? The general New Testament, or quote from some of the thousands of manuscripts?
Parts of the New Testament have been preserved in more manuscripts than any other ancient work, having over 5,800 complete or fragmented Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin manuscripts and 9,300 manuscripts in various other ancient languages including Syriac, Slavic, Gothic, Ethiopic, Coptic and Armenian. The dates of these manuscripts range from c. 125 (the John Ryland's manuscript, P52; oldest copy of John fragments) to the introduction of printing in Germany in the 15th century. The vast majority of these manuscripts date after the 10th century. Although there are more manuscripts that preserve the New Testament than there are for any other ancient writing, the exact form of the text preserved in these later, numerous manuscripts may not be identical to the form of the text as it existed in antiquity. Textual scholar Bart Ehrman writes: "It is true, of course, that the New Testament is abundantly attested in the manuscripts produced through the ages, but most of these manuscripts are many centuries removed from the originals, and none of them perfectly accurate. They all contain mistakes - altogether many thousands of mistakes. It is not an easy task to reconstruct the original words of the New Testament....

Is the New Testament Reliable? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... ZPs#t=371s (Dr. Bart D. Ehrman, 30+ years of historical investigation)

Danieltwotwenty wrote: If you read through the main site all your objections on creation have been answered, the Bible actually lines up with what we have learnt from science.


http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... bible.html


http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... y-age.html


http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/creation.html

I've read these once before, I saw references to the Old Testament, I was corrected earlier in another forum that the Old Testament is to be disregarded since Jesus came, is this true or not?
This is an important factor.

-Jordan

I'm sorry sno I feel I am wasting my time with you, if your purpose here is just to grind your axe then maybe this isn't the place for you. I am not going to keep repeating myself over and over in different threads.

I have a question for you, do you think the truth of the Bible could be real and that your understanding could be faulty?
Are you here as a genuine seeker who is interested in Christianity or are you here to discredit and argue?

I am not trying to be nasty or dismissive, I really hope you do understand one day how much God loves you.

Dan

Sno i never understand why people like you have so much hatred toward the idea that God is real. is it that you dont want to admit like all of us you're just a sinner? do you want to justify the way you live as being right even though you know you do wrong? is it that you dont want to admit that deep down you are a failure and let others down but get upset when you are let down thus making you a hypocrite that can't live according to standards you yourself cant meet? is it because acknowledging God's existence means you have to face the reality that you are in fact a sinful person and because of that you would have to come to terms that you can't do it on your own but need God? i dont know sno but be honest with yourself and do some honest searching or you may regret it later....

Zionist wrote:Sno i never understand why people like you have so much hatred toward the idea that God is real. is it that you dont want to admit like all of us you're just a sinner? do you want to justify the way you live as being right even though you know you do wrong? is it that you dont want to admit that deep down you are a failure and let others down but get upset when you are let down thus making you a hypocrite that can't live according to standards you yourself cant meet? is it because acknowledging God's existence means you have to face the reality that you are in fact a sinful person and because of that you would have to come to terms that you can't do it on your own but need God? i dont know sno but be honest with yourself and do some honest searching or you may regret it later....

Hatred towards God? I'm going to borrow a quote from another thread:/

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... =3&t=37993

PaulSacramento wrote:
The only "attrocities" commited directly by God were:
Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, Plagues of Egypt.
Taken into their context and the reasons given, IF God is a Just God, then those acts were warranted.

There was no "divine command" for 9/11, you won't find any muslim say there was a divine command from Allah to fly planes into a building.
And if the "validity" of the act is confirmed by it's "success" then what can be said about the retribution for the act?
If 3000 dead means "Allah approved" then does all that happened after mean "God approved more" ?

Back to the subject of the thread:
The clear cut issue is simple and that is: IF God is GOD then YES, any command is moral, regardless of how we humans view it.
Whether YOU like the answer or not is irrelevant.
You just need to understand what this means: If God is GOD.

If there is a God, I'm not angry with him, I am angry with your Christian interpretation of God.
For a good reason, he has a lot to answer for.
Even if his ONLY atrocity was the flood, that killed EVERYTHING on the planet didn't it?
Let's think rationally for a minute, this is GodandScience correct?
Why would someone divine need to do that?
Someone that created the ENTIRE Universe?
The Bible is a Moral framework for Christians, some but not all Christians believe the Bible to be literally to be true.

I'm completely open to the idea of there being a God.
If I'm going to believe in the Christian interpretation of God, there is a lot that needs to be answered.
My goal is to try to understand why there is so much negativity in the Bible from a Christian perspective. Given the subject "Bible: Literally or Not"

I appreciate the replies thus far, I have had a lot to think about,
Thanks,
Jordan

snorider wrote: Even if his ONLY atrocity was the flood, that killed EVERYTHING on the planet didn't it?

No. Some think so, but I would suggest you read:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... flood.html

snorider wrote: Let's think rationally for a minute, this is GodandScience correct?
Why would someone divine need to do that?

Why do bad things happen at all? Sounds like the 'Problem of Evil' criticism.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... ering.html

If there is a God, I'm not angry with him, I am angry with your Christian interpretation of God.
For a good reason, he has a lot to answer for.
Even if his ONLY atrocity was the flood, that killed EVERYTHING on the planet didn't it?
Let's think rationally for a minute, this is GodandScience correct?
Why would someone divine need to do that?
Someone that created the ENTIRE Universe?
The Bible is a Moral framework for Christians, some but not all Christians believe the Bible to be literally to be true.

I'm completely open to the idea of there being a God.
If I'm going to believe in the Christian interpretation of God, there is a lot that needs to be answered.
My goal is to try to understand why there is so much negativity in the Bible from a Christian perspective. Given the subject "Bible: Literally or Not"

I appreciate the replies thus far, I have had a lot to think about,
Thanks,
Jordan

If God is GOD, He has NOTHING to answer for because ALL THIS is HIS to do what He likes with and you and I have not only no say in the matter, we can't even begin to comprehend the "whys" if ANY of this.
IF you ever get to "meet" God personally, believe me ( or don't), you won't be the one "asking God for answers".

Yes, IF you take the flood account in Genesis as literal AND concrete then yes, God did destroy ALMOST every living thing.
Not everyone does take the account as such of course, BUT even if it was, why did He do it?

First, He Is God, which means He has the divine right to do with His creation whatever He wants.
Second, according to the same Genesis, He had reason, divine and just reason, to destroy the evil that had contaminated creation at that time:
The Corruption of Mankind

6 Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “(A)My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, (B)because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The (C)Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that (D)every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 (E)The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was (F)grieved in His heart. 7 The Lord said, “(G)I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for (H)I am sorry that I have made them.

But God didn't destroy them yet, nope, for years, deacades even, Noah preached as he built the ark, for people to repent and, much like in Sodom and Gomorrah, none were found righteous enough to be saved.

DO you not think that IF God is GOD and as such, the source of Divine Justice, that He shouldn't do something? do you think it is right of God to allow such evil and hate to go unpunished when they have had decades to repent?

PaulSacramento wrote: If God is GOD, He has NOTHING to answer for because ALL THIS is HIS to do what He likes with and you and I have not only no say in the matter, we can't even begin to comprehend the "whys" if ANY of this.
IF you ever get to "meet" God personally, believe me ( or don't), you won't be the one "asking God for answers".

Muslim Extremists that bomb say the same thing.

PaulSacramento wrote: Yes, IF you take the flood account in Genesis as literal AND concrete then yes, God did destroy ALMOST every living thing.
Not everyone does take the account as such of course, BUT even if it was, why did He do it?

God is omnipotent and omniscient?

PaulSacramento wrote: First, He Is God, which means He has the divine right to do with His creation whatever He wants.
Second, according to the same Genesis, He had reason, divine and just reason, to destroy the evil that had contaminated creation at that time:
The Corruption of Mankind

Ah, God's Will.. Just like it was God's will to destroy the buildings in 9/11? It was Just, he allowed it to happen correct? Well, in the mind of the extremists. I suppose killing everything on Earth is OK, it isn't like he's a "see above" omniscient entity.

PaulSacramento wrote: 6 Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “(A)My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, (B)because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The (C)Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that (D)every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 (E)The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was (F)grieved in His heart. 7 The Lord said, “(G)I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for (H)I am sorry that I have made them.

Just, from a omniscient entity that hasn't really interacted with humanity except for destroying it ages ago.

PaulSacramento wrote: But God didn't destroy them yet, nope, for years, deacades even, Noah preached as he built the ark, for people to repent and, much like in Sodom and Gomorrah, none were found righteous enough to be saved.

DO you not think that IF God is GOD and as such, the source of Divine Justice, that He shouldn't do something? do you think it is right of God to allow such evil and hate to go unpunished when they have had decades to repent?

IF God is God, the source of Divine Justice, do you think he should act like a five year old and stomp on an ant hill?

Ridiculous.

http://tinyurl.com/apcvjee



Jordan

What did Rob say...... oh yea .......if you listen really closely you can hear an axe grinding in the distance.

Dan

Sno, you have just argued again that God commanded 9/11. Read these words carefully.

He did not command it, God had NOTHING to do with the decision to bomb the twin-towers.

Give me evidence to back up your claim.

SB

Sam1995 wrote:Sno, you have just argued again that God commanded 9/11. Read these words carefully.

He did not command it, God had NOTHING to do with the decision to bomb the twin-towers.

Give me evidence to back up your claim.

SB

Huh? You're an idiot. Did you even read what I said?

http://tinyurl.com/apcvjee

snorider wrote:

Sam1995 wrote:Sno, you have just argued again that God commanded 9/11. Read these words carefully.

He did not command it, God had NOTHING to do with the decision to bomb the twin-towers.

Give me evidence to back up your claim.

SB

Huh? You're an idiot. Did you even read what I said?

http://tinyurl.com/apcvjee

This has now been reduced to name calling.