Christ never taught anyone to be evil and horrific.
When are you going to wake up to the fact that if Christ ever existed he was just a human. A good guy, another teacher of moral behavior like Muhammed , Gandhi, and Buddha.
Jesus is the only one who claimed to be the son of God, an act of pride which cost him his life.
When I see people do wickedness in God’s name I know they are hiding behind a false front. The goal of the Serpent since the garden has always been to cast doubt on God’s word and character.
When I see people do wickedness in God's name I know they believe that they are being true. The Crusaders did not hide behind a false front or act from whispers of Demons. They offered personal sacrifice in the noble act of protecting the Christian world. How dare you accused them of wickedness.
And that is the history of religion in a nutshell. It starts as a noble goal and becomes corrupted by power. Fortunately, Nature has a way of balancing the scales and maintain order in the greater scheme of things.
You just expressed a false analogy, because you can, and I am here to set you straight…
When are you going to wake up to the fact that if Christ ever existed he was just a human. A good guy, another teacher of moral behavior like Muhammed , Gandhi, and Buddha.
Never.
Jesus is the only one who claimed to be the son of God, an act of pride which cost him his life.
Disbelief does not equal reality or truth.
When I see people do wickedness in God’s name I know they believe that they are being true. The Crusaders did not hide behind a false front or act from whispers of Demons. They offered personal sacrifice in the noble act of protecting the Christian world. How dare you accused them of wickedness.
I do not know them so why would I call them anything? They sure did not obey Jesus. If you claim they did then show us where Jesus told us to kill?
And that is the history of religion in a nutshell. It starts as a noble goal and becomes corrupted by power. Fortunately, Nature has a way of balancing the scales and maintain order in the greater scheme of things.
Religious people killed Jesus. That is in a nutshell where religious people are at.
You believe in the christian god, I don’t. You cannot prove it exists but you have faith. Faith is behind reason but to believe is a right. existence of god cannot be proved or disproved. I believe that as long as it cannot be proved, he does not exists and that in fact men create gods according to their needs and that their creations reflect their views of world, of themselves and of society.
After that, you say that the scriptures have been written by men inspired by god, but there you should prove it and that’s impossible. Or, it is a question of faith and you must acknowledge it.
And last, the way scriptures are read and interpreted are necessarily the work of men. Men read and interpret the scriptures according their beliefs. Scriptures can be read in a way or in another one, the light being concentrated upon such point or another one. That’s a choice.
When crusaders killed every one in Jerusalem not christian after taking the town, they thought they did the work of god. When Catholics and Reformers devastated Germany during the thirty years war, they claimed they were doing the work of god. You disclaim that and you are right, but their reading of the scriptures was no more legitimate than yours.
any one here agree with the actions demanded by Roger Hallan here from XR?
Let’s be clear, considering actions to take regarding climate change - is way different from understanding the science behind what’s causing AGW.
Yes sure you need to understand the science to imagine solutions, but they are very different animals, just the same.
<blockquote>@Dad1. The billions of years is fantasy and purely belief based.</blockquote>
Have you ever taken the time to learn about it, because that statement sounds more like an assumption, not anything based on scientific understanding.
For starters how about the physical evidence of the Geologic Column?
<blockquote><a href="https://confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot.com/2019/12/whos-questioning-geologic-column.html">https://confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot.com/2019/12/whos-questioning-geologic-column.html</a>
<img src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9kBvVKcVtyE/WybXwNznImI/AAAAAAAACtI/6Ar2maFAm5ISzaa7VcWMa1BeXgp2Je6cACLcBGAs/s400/image.WayneRanney%252C%2BGeologic%2BColumn%2Bfor%2Bthe%2BGrand%2BStaircase%2BDownsized.tiff" alt="" width="400" height="267" /></blockquote>
... But my pleasant reverie was shattered by a YouTube comment that blind-sided me. One ‘Psalm1Tree’ wrote in all seriousness:
<blockquote>“There never was a Devonian period, just as there never was a Cambrian, Jurassic, Triassic etc. period. That's because there never was a Geologic Column. That is a 19th century construct that has no data whatsoever to support it.”</blockquote>
"... Besides avoiding the topic of the video, the comment is such an ignorant statement on so many levels that most who know anything about geology and evolution would simply clamp on the head-vise and back away.
Unfortunately, decades of ignoring such belligerent ignorance about important aspects of our life and planet have led to its becoming so insidious and commonplace that our government is controlled by Republicans who disregard obvious physical realities on personal whim. Justified only by a hubristic conceit that they are doing “God’s duty,” they are in fact all about pursuing their own EGO’s bidding.
I decided to engage Psalm with a short video that rationally explains what the geologic column is all about. Then came my second shock. I was not prepared for the dozens of videos dedicated to childish denials of the "geologic column” that Google's YouTube search algorithm threw between my search topic and reliable serious information.
The handful of videos I sampled broke the first law of Constructive Debate: Honestly represent your opponents’ position! Instead they painted a deliberately misleading cartoon, thus fabricating an easy target for battering to death. ...
How Science Figured Out the Age of Earth
For centuries scholars sought to determine Earth’s age, but the answer had to wait for careful geologic observation, isotopic analyses of the elements and an understanding of radioactive decay.
By Paul S. Braterman on October 20, 2013 - Scientific American
You believe in the christian god, I don’t. You cannot prove it exists but you have faith. Faith is behind reason but to believe is a right. existence of god cannot be proved or disproved. I believe that as long as it cannot be proved, he does not exists and that in fact men create gods according to their needs and that their creations reflect their views of world, of themselves and of society.
You do not believe in God, I do. You cannot prove He does not exist, and dismiss a world of history and evidence that says He does. You can believe that a majority of men in all areas and times were wrong for no reason if you choose.
After that, you say that the scriptures have been written by men inspired by god, but there you should prove it and that’s impossible. Or, it is a question of faith and you must acknowledge it.
Knowing starts off as a question of faith. Once people meet their Friend and experience His presence and Spirit, it becomes a matter of knowing. Having a record that contains hundreds of prophesies that are mostly all fulfilled now, and part of history add to this evidence and experience and knowledge. Doubting the spiritual realm is a matter of faith and you should acknowledge it.
And last, the way scriptures are read and interpreted are necessarily the work of men. Men read and interpret the scriptures according their beliefs. Scriptures can be read in a way or in another one, the light being concentrated upon such point or another one. That’s a choice.
Wicked men and even Satan do try to twist and use Scripture for their own purposes. However, God promises to reveal truth to the sincere. We would no more expect universal agreement among men regarding Scripture than we should expect all men to be sheep of wolves. We do not see universal agreement in science either. The same evidence and facts you might use to promote a theory of climate change, others might use to dispute it.
When crusaders killed every one in Jerusalem not christian after taking the town, they thought they did the work of god. When Catholics and Reformers devastated Germany during the thirty years war, they claimed they were doing the work of god. You disclaim that and you are right, but their reading of the scriptures was no more legitimate than yours.
People that commit murder and crimes using a cross on their tee shirt or shield in NO way are doing what Jesus said. The best you could say for such ignorant and deluded folks is that they did not know Scripture or God and were tricked into doing bad things by leaders trying to use God as the excuse for doing what they wanted to do.
For starters how about the physical evidence of the Geologic Column?
Yes. There were many layers that got deposited over time. The issue is not the layers we see, but the beliefs used (that result in great time) when looking at these layers. In NO way do they help your beliefs.
Yes. There were many layers that got deposited over time. The issue is not the layers we see, but the beliefs used (that result in great time) when looking at these layers. In NO way do they help your beliefs.
Are you claiming that these layers were not deposited over large time frames? Ok, we are in agreement on the layers, but disagree on the time frames.
Do tell, how long is your time frame of the layers and on what data do you base those shorter time frames?
Are you claiming that these layers were not deposited over large time frames? Ok, we are in agreement on the layers, but disagree on the time frames.
Do tell, how long is your time frame of the layers and on what data do you base those shorter time frames?
I was pointing out that all the reasons old ages are assigned to the layers are faith based. It doesn’t matter what other beliefs we can use instead. The point is that the ages are faith based. You cannot support them. Using other beliefs we could arrive at very different dates. You see, when we look at isotope ratios in this present nature we notice they are formed a certain way and at a certain rate. Unless nature was always the same (and we do not know it was) then we cannot say that all the ratios we now see came about by and from and in this nature. Nor can we assume that much or most of these ratios were already here in another nature doing something else! To ‘date’ rocks based on the present and our current laws and nature is nothing more than a statement of faith that the current nature did it all!
An example of a fantastic difference in dates based on the starting beliefs used in interpreting radioactive ratios (in various ways and methods) is the time of the KT layer. I assume at the moment (subject to new evidence) that the flood year was probably around that time. If correct that means that in real time the KT layer was put down around 4500 actual years ago or so. The belief based dates science uses place that time at somewhere around 66-70 million years ago!
I assume at the moment (subject to new evidence) that the flood year was probably around that time. If correct that means that in real time the KT layer was put down around 4500 actual years ago or so
And where is that new evidence? A link would be helpful. Just copy and paste the addy.
At this time I see only an unsupported assumption. I am sure you can do better than that.
This is not a casual chatsite. This is Center for Inquiry, supported by a serious non-for-profit organization with many associated reputable people. It is expected that when you make an extra-ordinary claim you can provide at least a link to some scientific data that supports the claim.
p.s. Nature does not work in mysterious ways. That claim is made in reference to God, especially when that is in conflict with the scientific data.
And where is that new evidence? A link would be helpful. Just copy and paste the addy.
You misunderstand. What I was saying was that unless there is some evidence that arises that I have not seen that might change my opinion of the timing of the flood, my current guess will remain that it was probably somewhere around the time of the KT layer. (as mentioned the position is still subject to change if new evidence arises)
At this time I see only an unsupported assumption. I am sure you can do better than that.
Science is the party with the claim here, and their unsupportable date is as mentioned, many tens of millions of years. If you think you can support the date then do give us your best shot and see how you fare:)
This is not a casual chatsite. This is Center for Inquiry, supported by a serious non-for-profit organization with many associated reputable people. It is expected that when you make an extra-ordinary claim you can provide at least a link to some scientific data that supports the claim.
It is not me that has the science claim that requires support here. I am merely pointing out that the dream dates based on faith and faith alone that science offers are not serious and are truly belief based and unsupportable. So if you think you can reply to that inquiry, we wait! Sorry the organization you thought was serious will not be able to do that, and neither will you or anyone else. Try to remember that some people here are adults and require serious replies, and not comedy routines you seem to think might be serious!
p.s. Nature does not work in mysterious ways.
PPS Who said it did?? Is this more comedy?
That claim is made in reference to God, especially when that is in conflict with the scientific data.
Science cannot so much as detect God, let alone report on how He works..or not! Please drop the dull witted comedy.
The difference between science and faith : faith cannot be proved or disproved, a scientific theory can be.
About age of earth and universe.
Faith gives us roughly 6000 computed by religious men, having deducted it from a controversial reading of scriptures. Theses scriptures are the work of men who wrote them according their view of the world. It was deducted from theses scriptures that the sun turns around earth.
Even if these men were inspired by god, which i do not believe,they can be perfect. From a religious point of view would mean that there is something in universe which is not god and which is perfect.
Science gives us an earth of roughly 4 000 000 000 years. This has been computed by scientific methods. And, the debate is still open.
The difference between science and faith : faith cannot be proved or disproved, a scientific theory can be.
False. Origins theories cannot be proven or disproved. God has been proven in the lives of millions of people over time. He cannot be proven in all lives because He only works in an observable way in the lives of people who chose to have faith!
About age of earth and universe.
Faith gives us roughly 6000 computed by religious men, having deducted it from a controversial reading of scriptures. Theses scriptures are the work of men who wrote them according their view of the world. It was deducted from theses scriptures that the sun turns around earth.
Faith also gives us the millions and billions of years in science! Nothing BUT faith in fact. Man does not ‘compute’ years since Adam lived. God gave the genealogy!
Even if these men were inspired by god, which i do not believe,they can be perfect. From a religious point of view would mean that there is something in universe which is not god and which is perfect.
If, as you say, men were moved by the spirit of God (inspired) then it is not the men which are perfect there, it is the Perfect God that inspired them.
Science gives us an earth of roughly 4 000 000 000 years. This has been computed by scientific methods. And, the debate is still open.
False. There is nothing but faith and faith based methods that yield such imaginary years. To call it science is to do violence to the English language! It is , as the bible properly labels it ‘science, falsely so called’! There is no actual fact or evidence or knowledge or repeatability, test-ability etc involved at all in origins fables that are falsely called science.
You have never heard of the scientific method have you? Let me enlighten you about Science and how it works.
The scientific method is often represented as an ongoing process
Scientific method
The scientific method is an empirical method of acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century. It involves careful observation, applying rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given that cognitive assumptions can distort how one interprets the observation. It involves formulating hypotheses, via induction, based on such observations; experimental and measurement-based testing of deductions drawn from the hypotheses; and refinement (or elimination) of the hypotheses based on the experimental findings. These are principles of the scientific method, as distinguished from a definitive series of steps applicable to all scientific enterprises.
I was pointing out that all the reasons old ages are assigned to the layers are faith based.
@Dad1. I wonder if you realize you've reduced faith to a joke. Those layers of rocks have been measured and catalogued, so you are claiming that believing in the reading an instrument gives us is FAITH. Or that a scientists who's conducted a series of experiments, has FAITH in his instruments and FAITH their measurements. That recognizing and recording patterns and how they change is an act of FAITH.
@Dad1 ignores that religious FAITH is all about ignoring physical evidence in favor of embracing our own inner imagination and dogmas that we ourselves create. Dad1 will reject that and insist that his god is the ultimate good and the Bible is his thoughts. But can he answer why those precious Abrahamic words spawned hundreds of different sub-religions and cults, many in conflict with each other.
Dad1 talks about the proof in the lives of millions of people. What kind of proof is that? Billions of people are like sheople and follow the guy with the biggest mouth, so long as they are told what they want to hear, no matter how insane and disconnected from Physical Reality… Am I supposed to believe that Trump is the Truth, just because a third of our country is so scared and clueless that they willing embrace a crazy man demigod, with a golden, if nasty as hell, tongue???
I’ll take my “proofs” from rocks and plants and this planet and careful constructive study, following by construct truth-based debates, thank you very much.
I get the impression that dad1 is just trying to reduce “Science” to the same wishful thinking as faith-based religion.
As has been witnessed, not all prayers are answered, or are answered in a consistent, predictable way.
Imagine if Newton dropped an apple, and sometimes it would fall down, sometimes it would just float there and do nothing, and sometimes it would fly upwards. … no matter how hard he wished (prayed) that it would fall to the ground consistently, every time.
Science is based on consistency and predictability. The advancement of society is based on consistency and predictability - science.
Even Nature depends on the science of consistency and predictability.
When we start seeing apples fly upwards and ice cubes coalesce on hot pavement, then we’ll start to re-examine our understanding of “Science”.
I get the impression that dad1 is just trying to reduce “Science” to the same wishful thinking as faith-based religion. -- mrm
Good analogy to back up that statement. When I reviewed his posts, looking for abusive language, there was one I didn't include. He calls science faith-based and says God is just true. Then he goes into his usual rants about not being able to disprove and how once you accept some scientific precept then it works, but that acceptance is a "belief". I'm not going to bother to attempt to define words for him.
The scientific method is often represented as an ongoing process