religion

[Dior]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You have yet to provide one scripture.
But let's assume for the sake of argument that you mean to refer to John 1:1-3 as proof of Jesus being the Creator.

Let's see if you can keep up with the logic here.

The person who became known as Jesus Christ did not begin life here on earth. He himself spoke of his prehuman heavenly life. (Joh 3:13; 6:38, 62; 8:23, 42, 58) John 1:1, 2 gives the heavenly name of the one who became Jesus, saying: “In the beginning the Word [Gr., Lo′gos] was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god"

This one was in the beginning with God.” Since Jehovah is eternal and had no beginning (Ps 90:2; Re 15:3), the Word’s being with God from “the beginning” must here refer to the beginning of Jehovah’s creative works. This is confirmed by other texts identifying Jesus as “the firstborn of all creation,” “the beginning of the creation by God.” (Col 1:15; Re 1:1; 3:14) Thus the Scriptures identify the Word (Jesus in his prehuman existence) as God’s first creation, his firstborn Son.


That Jehovah was truly the Father or Life-Giver to this firstborn Son and, hence, that this Son was actually a creature of God is evident from Jesus’ own statements. He pointed to God as the Source of his life, saying, “I live because of the Father.” According to the context, this meant that his life resulted from or was caused by his Father, even as the gaining of life by dying men would result from their faith in Jesus’ ransom sacrifice.—Joh 6:56, 57.

Holy shit, your whole post was copy/pasted from http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002451


Get fuckt and stop with the copy/pasting community college bullshit. Don't worry tho, I'll give you an A for effort.

Can we get a ruling on failing at the google game?

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by Dior [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Of course you have full knowledge of your posts. You're the one that wrote. What you don't have is full knowledge of the quotes you've googled for.

It's a bit embarrassing that no one called you out on your laughable knowledge of the Bible, when that's your primary anchor point for arguing.

It might take you a while to look up all of those supportive scriptures. Take your time. Google for rebuttals. And don't worry I already know what your arguments will be and have an answer for them. This isn't my first rodeo in biblical debate. But it probably the easiest I have encountered.

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by Dior [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Holy shit, your whole post was copy/pasted from http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002451


Get fuckt and stop with the copy/pasting community college bullshit. Don't worry tho, I'll give you an A for effort.

Can we get a ruling on failing at the google game?

Yes it was copy pasted so what? I have that site on hand for trolls like you.

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by Toofliss [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm thankful for the modern advances that science has provided us. I firmly believe that science will continue to better our lives, but I don't place it on some pedal stool. Time and time again we've had it wrong and had to rewrite theories.

Some are willing to look past the current gaps in the theory of evolution and put faith in the hope that some day we'll be able to answer all those gaps with solid facts. I'm a little skeptical that this will ever happen. This blind faith is the same sort that I use, but you seem to think I'm batshit crazy for it because I chose to back a different opinion.

That being said, I too like to sit and observe/reflect on my surroundings. The amazing complexity of the world all around us simply leads me to believe that there was something far greater than humans will ever comprehend that put together this wonderful symphony. It seems that some scientists openly acknowledge this same observation.

For now I believe that there was some higher being that I'll reference as God. If someday down the road scientists are able to close all the gaps in evolution and provide solid evidence then perhaps I'll change my mind. I'm open to new information and look to incorporate it when making decisions. Some in this thread lead me to believe that God could reveal himself to you, smack you in the face, and you'd still claim that there is no God. The amazing probability of all of what we see/exists came about due to random chance? That's more far fetched in my mind that a supreme being flipping a switch or waving his hand.

Firstly, pedestal.

When considering The Big Questions, we're all skeptical that we'll get the answers we're looking for. To stop being skeptical is the death of thought, and reason, and rational inquiry. If you want to refer to skepticism as faith, you're more than welcome to do so. If your skepticism to you somehow validates jumping to the conclusion that an all-powerful, omnibenevolent and supernatural power miraculously created the universe, then by all means go right ahead. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. Don't teach it to my kids, and keep it to yourself. I don't want to hear about it.

I have seen leewong indeed say that there is no god, but this is not my stance. I'm not making any claims that there is, or is not any supernatural dictator at the beginning of the universe or the end of life. If tomorrow the son of this supposed creator descends from the heavens and raptures every believer into an eternity of praise and worship and servitude, then I will by definition have to immediately become a believer.

It is also not my stance that belief in the supernatural or the divine is the same thing as insanity, or stupidity - but it is immoral. You say you're thankful for modern science, yet you're so eager to go right ahead and assume that just because the theory of evolution doesn't answer every question about humanity, it makes perfect sense to pretend that god is not only responsible for the universe itself but created it with you in mind. This is an astoundingly arrogant claim to be making, yet this is what you must believe if you even so much as call yourself a deist. This is sheer solipsism; it's not conducive of rational thought or healthy for the mind in any way whatsoever.

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by Dior [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Holy shit, your whole post was copy/pasted from http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002451


Get fuckt and stop with the copy/pasting community college bullshit. Don't worry tho, I'll give you an A for effort.

Can we get a ruling on failing at the google game?

Still waiting for some scriptural rebuttal. But it's late and I have to get up early so I will have to read it in the morning

[Dior]

Originally Posted by Toofliss [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I've seen him back up his statements time and time again throughout this thread. You on the other hand keep being cryptic and mysterious.

While not a direct quote, your posts feel like "Ohhh, you're so ignorant about this subject matter. I know the real truth, but I can't reveal it too you. You must go search for it. Whatever IT may be."

If anything, it feels like you're the one googling for responses. 'Somewhere' within John you'll find the answer. Where? I'm not certain, the google page I pulled up didn't tell me, but its in there! Go, look!

You don't get it. I want him to really read the chapter of John.

Shit, you can do a simple search to see if I am right or wrong. But I want him to really read it.

The best ammo against a Christian is the Bible because the grand majority of them don't know it and pick quotes that suite them instead of actually reading whole chapters.

Not that Elvish is Christian. He just accepted the role of sacrifice for the sake of entertainment, and I'm more than happy to oblige calling him out on the obvious quote mining.

[Dior]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Still waiting for some scriptural rebuttal. But it's late and I have to get up early so I will have to read it in the morning

Thank you for giving up after being caught.

[Toofliss]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Firstly, pedestal.

When considering The Big Questions, we're all skeptical that we'll get the answers we're looking for. To stop being skeptical is the death of thought, and reason, and rational inquiry. If you want to refer to skepticism as faith, you're more than welcome to do so. If your skepticism to you somehow validates jumping to the conclusion that an all-powerful, omnibenevolent and supernatural power miraculously created the universe, then by all means go right ahead. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. Don't teach it to my kids, and keep it to yourself. I don't want to hear about it.

I have seen leewong indeed say that there is no god, but this is not my stance. I'm not making any claims that there is, or is not any supernatural dictator at the beginning of the universe or the end of life. If tomorrow the son of this supposed creator descends from the heavens and raptures every believer into an eternity of praise and worship and servitude, then I will by definition have to immediately become a believer.

It is also not my stance that belief in the supernatural or the divine is the same thing as insanity, or stupidity - but it is immoral. You say you're thankful for modern science, yet you're so eager to go right ahead and assume that just because the theory of evolution doesn't answer every question about humanity, it makes perfect sense to pretend that god is not only responsible for the universe itself but created it with you in mind. This is an astoundingly arrogant claim to be making, yet this is what you must believe if you even so much as call yourself a deist. This is sheer solipsism; it's not conducive of rational thought or healthy for the mind in any way whatsoever.

Where do I start? I'll try to reply paragraph by paragraph. I thought I plainly stated that you've put your faith in the theory of evolution (including the gaps to which we don't currently have answers) as the way in which all things came about. Am I skeptical of that? Of course...but truth be known, I'm not rock solid in my faith as a Christian. But if I'm forced to choose between the two (because school forces one down your throat while openly declaring war on alternatives) then I choose my current stance, that there is overwhelming evidence that someone/thing put all these rules into place. It's too much for me to swallow that the rules of our sandbox is mere chance.

Mostly skipping 2nd paragraph, good to see that at the very least you'd be open to blatant evidence. I'd be the same way with God or the theory of evolution. The point I'll make with this paragraph is that you're comfortable believing this theory. That to me is your faith. I see that as less probable than alternatives.

Now the third paragraph you dive off the deep end. Immoral? It's immoral that I put my faith in something you think less likely than your choice? If new facts come about that completely shatter the theory of evolution, could I call you immoral because you believed it? Yes, I am thankful for science. I was by no means eager to believe in a supreme being. 20+ (I'm mid 30s, not including baby years here) years I would have sided with you and said that God was a fairy tale. It was only after some deep observation of the world around me and trying to rationalize what I think is more probable that I came to my current belief system. The astonishing arrogance in this thread has come from those who claim to know the answer. No one knows...we're still trying to figure it out. In the meantime, you want to silence opposition to your side of the argument. We're immoral in our thinking and must be stopped. We can't spread our 'disease' of thought. I questioned everything for years and continue to do so. This is why I often wonder if I'll ever progress to be solid in my faith as a Christian and instead move towards some other belief (haven't googled the right term for it) where I believe in a creator even if it's not God as presented in the Bible.

Here is my question to you. Until all of the gaps are filled and the doubt is removed, can we stop teaching both in school? Teach the FACTS as we currently know them and let kids come to their own realization. Stop filling in the gaps with what we 'think' must have happened, yet have no firm proof to back up. Let them question everything without preconceived notions as to which one is right and which one can't possibly be. I think deep down both sides of this argument know that we won't know 100% for certain until we're six feet under. Imagination is a great thing for innovation and science. What if some child with a wild imagination someday comes up with a crazy thought that eventually unravels the matrix we live in and leads to the answers we've all missed due to our preconceived notions as to which side is right/wrong? Maybe he is able to positively disprove God and your side can be giddy with joy, but if you have him chasing the never-to-be-found answers to the theory of evolution he may miss it all together.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by Toofliss [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Where do I start? I'll try to reply paragraph by paragraph. I thought I plainly stated that you've put your faith in the theory of evolution (including the gaps to which we don't currently have answers) as the way in which all things came about. Am I skeptical of that? Of course...but truth be known, I'm not rock solid in my faith as a Christian. But if I'm forced to choose between the two (because school forces one down your throat while openly declaring war on alternatives) then I choose my current stance, that there is overwhelming evidence that someone/thing put all these rules into place. It's too much for me to swallow that the rules of our sandbox is mere chance.

Mostly skipping 2nd paragraph, good to see that at the very least you'd be open to blatant evidence. I'd be the same way with God or the theory of evolution. The point I'll make with this paragraph is that you're comfortable believing this theory. That to me is your faith. I see that as less probable than alternatives.

Now the third paragraph you dive off the deep end. Immoral? It's immoral that I put my faith in something you think less likely than your choice? If new facts come about that completely shatter the theory of evolution, could I call you immoral because you believed it? Yes, I am thankful for science. I was by no means eager to believe in a supreme being. 20+ (I'm mid 30s, not including baby years here) years I would have sided with you and said that God was a fairy tale. It was only after some deep observation of the world around me and trying to rationalize what I think is more probable that I came to my current belief system. The astonishing arrogance in this thread has come from those who claim to know the answer. No one knows...we're still trying to figure it out. In the meantime, you want to silence opposition to your side of the argument. We're immoral in our thinking and must be stopped. We can't spread our 'disease' of thought. I questioned everything for years and continue to do so. This is why I often wonder if I'll ever progress to be solid in my faith as a Christian and instead move towards some other belief (haven't googled the right term for it) where I believe in a creator even if it's not God as presented in the Bible.

Here is my question to you. Until all of the gaps are filled and the doubt is removed, can we stop teaching both in school? Teach the FACTS as we currently know them and let kids come to their own realization. Stop filling in the gaps with what we 'think' must have happened, yet have no firm proof to back up. Let them question everything without preconceived notions as to which one is right and which one can't possibly be. I think deep down both sides of this argument know that we won't know 100% for certain until we're six feet under. Imagination is a great thing for innovation and science. What if some child with a wild imagination someday comes up with a crazy thought that eventually unravels the matrix we live in and leads to the answers we've all missed due to our preconceived notions as to which side is right/wrong? Maybe he is able to positively disprove God and your side can be giddy with joy, but if you have him chasing the never-to-be-found answers to the theory of evolution he may miss it all together.

You know, I keep seeing arguments like this and I can't help but wonder why there aren't more creationistic evolutionists (God gifted all life with the ability to adapt and change over time on an ever changing earth) around asking "por que no las dos?".

[Toofliss]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You know, I keep seeing arguments like this and I can't help but wonder why there aren't more creationistic evolutionists (God gifted all life with the ability to adapt and change over time on an ever changing earth) around asking "por que no las dos?".

I wasn't very warm to some of your other comments, but this is a great question in my eyes. I think it's a prime example of what our current education breeds. What if the current options being presented aren't all of the choices? We tend to shut down creative thinking in our current factories we call school.

That idea has some merit in my eyes and I'm disappointed I haven't given it more thought. Something I'll have to mull over.