Science marches on

[snakewispera snr]

WOW! No flaming definitely and none was ever intended. I truly wanted to know if there were places in the old testament that spoke of hell, the afterlife etc. in what I have always thought of in a very Christian way. I actually think you answered the question in a very Jewish way. You quoted books that quote Rabbis and the Talmud that interpret what the old testament says. I still don't see passages that clearly speak the "Christian" thoughts on hell and the afterlife. I think in fact you supported, extremely well, what I remember being taught. It's all very vague!

And as to the Christian's thoughts on my going to hell, I knew it already. I am probably going to hell, but not for the reasons the Christians think I am.

Thank you very much for the compliment.
I love all religions, I believe you cannot understand the man without understanding his belief.
And it helps to break the ice when I meet people from different cultures, to know their God..... LOL

 

[Susan]

I won't read this thread in it's entirely, nor post any further, as I can see that the "scientists" that provide the "facts" of evolution have closed too many minds to the truth. Most of the "facts" provided showing the evolution of man have been proven to be falsehoods. But then, if I post links, etc, I'll just be told that they are biased and lies. IMO, creationism holds just as much water as the theory of evolution...and they at least don't keep changing their minds every few decades based upon "new evidence". I'll find out the truth when everyone else does...when I die.

 

[snakewispera snr]

I won't read this thread in it's entirely, nor post any further, as I can see that the "scientists" that provide the "facts" of evolution have closed too many minds to the truth. Most of the "facts" provided showing the evolution of man have been proven to be falsehoods. But then, if I post links, etc, I'll just be told that they are biased and lies. IMO, creationism holds just as much water as the theory of evolution...and they at least don't keep changing their minds every few decades based upon "new evidence". I'll find out the truth when everyone else does...when I die.

Thats the fun of this debate..... No one can prove they are right... LOL

 

[vetusvates]

Wow, Mike (snakewispera_snr),....very very interesting reading, in post # 173. It is always a thrill to find more I haven't read, but feel driven to read.
O.K., I have a question for you, regarding where one (a 'good' person) goes immediately after death for a period, versus where one will spend eternity. I really want your take on this and how it fits in.
In 1 Samuel, chapter 28. (NIV)
Regarding the witch of Endor, the banishment of mediums, and the calling up by Saul of the ghost of Samuel. And his subsequent 'grouchiness' at being called up.
1 Samuel, 28:15 "Samuel said to Saul, 'Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?'....." (NIV)

Yes folks, I know and love my christian Bible. All 3-5 versions I have read, and all 6-8 versions that I own.
BibleGateway.com is on my bookmarks bar.
I believe with all my heart and mind that a well-rounded enlightenment is a Virtue. I believe a 'closed mind' is a sad pathetic waste of having been created in His image.

 

[tom e]

creationism holds just as much water as the theory of evolution...and they at least don't keep changing their minds every few decades based upon "new evidence".

Very well said, I think you've hit the difference exactly. Though I would say one should be open to new evidence. That's exactly why creationism is nothing like a science.

 

[snakewispera snr]

Good question Eric..... I'm not too sure good people go anywhere other than hell according to Christian values. Only the born again go to Heaven, all others , no matter how good, go to hell.
The Jews on the other hand have a special disposition afforded to them. They are the chosen ones so they go to limbo until the Earth is cleansed, ready for their return.
Judaism and Christianity believe that so it must be true....
Samuel, being a Jew could of been in limbo, and quite upset at being called by a necromancer (which had been recently outlawed by Saul)
And Saul was in disguise, so he knew he shouldn't be using witches and necromancers....

 

[vetusvates]

Thanks, Mike.
So if I were to interpret the Bible literally, there existed (and indeed exist) withches, mediums, necromancers, necromancing, ghosts, and some sort of waiting area for these ghosts to be summoned up from?
According to 1 Samuel, chapter 28.

( Sometimes I like being the devil's advocate too . In that , if one is a bible-thumper , and harps on the literal translation , ..... one cannot pick and choose .... one must embrace it all . )

 

[snakewispera snr]

You missed Demons and evil spirits.
Angels are a good one to read about. They are not the nice angelic thing we see in films and cartoons...
There's lots of different types of angel, each more scary than the last.
They are meant for holy war and look very much like demons. Archangels have seven pairs of wings and would scare you to death if you saw one, if I remember correct.

 

[vetusvates]

My next puzzlement is in Genesis, chapter 5. I've always been fascinated at the notion of Methuselah living 969 years. That's only 31 years shy of a millenium. If interpreted....literally....

 

[snakewispera snr]

And yet he's not the oldest person in the bible.....
Noah lived for 600 and some thing years, in fact lots of old Testament people lived for centuries....
But didn't Elisha go up in a flaming chariot without death mentioned. So technically he is over 6000 yrs old..... LOL
As far as the age of the old prophets..... Who knows...

 

[Nova_C]

I won't read this thread in it's entirely, nor post any further, as I can see that the "scientists" that provide the "facts" of evolution have closed too many minds to the truth.

It's a shame you won't post any further, Susan, because no one's ever convinced me of the truth, but that doesn't stop me from believing it's out there. I've never closed my mind to truth - I seek it constantly. I only wish I could find it.

 

[Roy Munson]

Science is made up of theory, there's no such thing as scientific fact, or a proven theory. Even gravity is still a theory.

Some theories stand the test of time and can never be disproven or falsified, so people come to think of them as facts, but they are still in essence, theories.

I haven't read the whole thread yet, so I'll reply as I go along...

A scientific theory MUST be falsifiable, or it's not a scientific theory. Science can only disprove-- it can't PROVE. That's how you can tell that Intelligent Design and creationism are b.s. theories, at least scientifically. They're unfalsifiable.

 

[Roy Munson]

But what also seems to be forgotten by Christians and anti-Christian people is that there is so much more going on than the bible could ever cover! We don't know exactly how everything happened. It's very much like the puzzle those who believe in evolution are trying to peice together. Creationists do something similar, they see what's said in the bible, they see the evidence around them, and realize it fits and then try to expand on what they know. No different for either group really. We have the same pile of bones and we interpret them differently.

Research the scientific method. Scientists and biblical creationists are not doing anything similar. Scientists are willing to dispense with theories after they are falsified (e.g. Lamarckism).

I haven't had anyone yet tell me why they have petrified trees that go through millions of layers vertically through the columns...how can trees that are vertical be present through millions of years of rock as you go up the layers? Be perfectly intact from top to bottom?

This question shouldn't "stump" anyone (LOL). I guess I'd like to see the evidence that supports the idea that these trees span alleged millions of years of strata. I'd also like to see a definition of "intact". Trees are long. They grow upright. If one is turned to stone and lies vertically in deposits of gradually layered, solidified sandstone (etc.), I don't see why it would be baffling for them to extend between multiple strata. :shrugs:

 

[Roy Munson]

I also strongly question how people can honestly believe the Big Bang theory, to think that we all came from some giant rock that just suddenly burst, then the organisms (which were initially created by?) evolved into humans that drive cars, go to sporting events, etc...

Find me someone who believes this, or more importantly, someone who has been convinced of this based on evidence. Strawmen are easy to tear down.

 

[Roy Munson]

And yes, for me it's the amazing diversity of species. Just take frogs for example. How could a stomach brooding frog evolve? Or one that hatches them fully formed from it's back as several species do? I think frogs alone are just so amazing in all the different shapes, colors, and the way they live... I can't just say that all evolved. I too struggle with aspects that the church tries to teach and claim is in the bible, but I feel some of those issues they are trying to get blood out of a turnip! But there are plenty of other things that they can back up with clear scripture.

How could a stomach-brooding frog evolve? Selective pressure. Natural selection provides a means for the craziest imaginable lifeforms and processes to exist. Now granted, if enough time isn't allowed for these forms and processes to evolve, then I can see how it would be difficult to believe that they developed natually (over 6,000-10,000 years). But there is next to zero evidence supporting the creationists' idea of a young earth, so I don't have a problem dismissing that time-line.

 

[Chip]

Here's an interesting breakdown of belief in evolution I stumbled upon, listed by country: http://www.stumbleupon.com/toolbar/...resident%2Facceptance-of-evolution-by-country

 

[Roy Munson]

I think in science there are absolutes and there are theories. A scientific test to detect a breast cancer gene is absolute, whether Ida is part of a human evolutionary line is a theory.

There are no absolutes in science, and no true scientist would claim that Ida is unquestionably a human ancestor. Don't confuse "USA Today" type headlines with scientific concensus.

My belief is that some scientific theories require a leap of faith similar to religion.

Your belief is wrong. Scientific theories require that accumlated evidence supports the theory, and that no piece of evidence disproves it. Faith has nothing to do with it.

 

[Roy Munson]

i realize that some species change over time, which is evolution, but to get a whole new species from the adaptations of another doesn't make sense to me.

Then I guess you can't understand how an accumulation of meters can be measured as kilometers...

 

[Roy Munson]

Well, I guess I could state my opinion on the subject of the thread. I think it is great that they made this discovery. Do I agree or disagree with their interpretations? Neither. I am going to wait until I can read a reputable publication of the findings, not take the "quotes" used by the media to make money off of the story.

I'm glad I read this post before I went on the "attack". You're right. The media is WELL aware of the controversy surrounding these subjects, and they are certainly not above exploiting it to increase printed or online circulation. We all need to employ critical thinking skills when we interpret ANY "fact" presented to us from the media...

 

[vetusvates]

Dean (Roy Munson). You, my good man, have 10 fold times 10, and 10 again over, earned my esteem as scientist, logician, and moderator. If I am ever accused of anything...rightfully or wrongfully...I would only pray that you were my judge. And if I were ever convicted of anything...to my sentence I'd gladly go, if only you were my judge.
If I could rep freely, I'd gladly give you all of mine. And bask in having none, but having given away all of it to you honestly and deservedly.