The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 1)

Zombrex

man of faith wrote: »

I am so glad that you have raised this point!:)

The Bible tells us that He has written His laws onto our hearts and minds and that we have been born with a conscious of eternal perspective. So thankyou for pointing that out, as you are right, we aren't born into this earth without knowing enough to know to seek Him.

Yes but the Bible could be wrong? There are literally thousands of religious books, how did you determine that the Bible was the correct one given that you apparently don't know a whole lot before you did?

Or did you just decide to start believing the first religious book you came across?

man of faith wrote: »

The reason I say without Him I know nothing is because that until I connect myself with Him and what is written in His word, my mind will be absolutely full of unanswered questions of which I have no way of knowing the answer to.

Such as Is the Bible the correct holy book to follow?

man of faith wrote: »

His Spirit illuminates the truth to you.

You have determined this how exactly?

Zombrex

wolfsbane wrote: »

I have a problem about how the fossil record is interpreted. The snapshots are linked together by the interpreter - they are not like a video. The sequence is in the mind of the beholder.

No, the "sequence" like everything in science is tested. The fossil record is an observed phenomena, and evolutionary theories are tested against this observed phenomena to see if their prediction matched observation. They do. No one looks at the fossil record and goes "umm, I wonder does this go here, and umm, maybe this goes there" :rolleyes:

You make the mistake of believing that proper science is as higgledy piggledy and guess work as Creationism is.

But interesting that you say that you object to things being in the mind of the beholder, since the idea that something must be designed is something that does lie solely in the mind of the beholder, and something that so far no one has been able to figure out how to test, unlike the sequences of the fossil record.

So you are just showing your hypocrisy and close mindedness, once again.

wolfsbane wrote: »

No doubt much of the evolutionist interpretation is honest conjecture

No it is testable theory. If it was honest conjecture it wouldn't be science.

wolfsbane

Malty_T wrote: »

Not precise enough.
Example : E Coli is helpful for digestion in the intestines, but you guessed it, bad for us if it contaminates our food.

So is E Coli good or evil??
This wasn't an evasion attempt, it was a recognition of the vagueness of a supposedly scientific statement.



The pedantic person out there will realise I wasn't precise enough either, but I was simply illustrating a point:p

I imagine JC would suggest this as an indication of e-coli's original function. I don't think he suggested God created bad bacteria sometime after the 6 day Creation. In fact, I'm sure he said all bacteria originally had only good purposes.

But to suit our pedantic friends, that means e-coli is both a good and a bad bacteria in its relationship to the human body.

Zombrex

wolfsbane wrote: »

I imagine JC would suggest this as an indication of e-coli's original function. I don't think he suggested God created bad bacteria sometime after the 6 day Creation. In fact, I'm sure he said all bacteria originally had only good purposes.

But to suit our pedantic friends, that means e-coli is both a good and a bad bacteria in its relationship to the human body.

And what is a "non-fly" again ... :rolleyes:

You do know it is painfully obvious that you guys are just making all this stuff up as you go along, right?

wolfsbane

Wicknight wrote: »

And what is a "non-fly" again ... :rolleyes:

You do know it is painfully obvious that you guys are just making all this stuff up as you go along, right?

I can give you many examples - a dog, a man, a spider, a bird, a worm, a bacterium, a rose. I knew evolutionists see everything as a spectrum, but I thought some common sense prevailed. :pac:

Turtwig

wolfsbane wrote: »

I can give you many examples - a dog, a man, a spider, a bird, a worm, a bacterium, a rose. I knew evolutionists see everything as a spectrum, but I thought some common sense prevailed. :pac:

Common sense is the truth's worst enemy:pac:

MjcMurfy

wolfsbane wrote: »

I imagine JC would suggest this as an indication of e-coli's original function. I don't think he suggested God created bad bacteria sometime after the 6 day Creation. In fact, I'm sure he said all bacteria originally had only good purposes.

But to suit our pedantic friends, that means e-coli is both a good and a bad bacteria in its relationship to the human body.

E-coli does not have a "funcion". Being the self-centred species we are, we look at behaviour and characteristics and ascribe "function" to it. Nor is it either "good" or "bad". It has evolved to take advantage of a ecological niche. Sometimes living in these "niches" will be beneficial to us as humans, sometimes not.

The concept if good and evil is outdated and useless. What you think evil may be normal to cultures in other parts of the world and vice versa.

Evolutionary theory is simple and obviously more correct than theology, once you can bring yourself to concieve of it impartially without trying to think of ways to defend your religious stance.

Morbert

man of faith wrote: »

Monosharp you watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh3f5KfXXOo&feature=related

And all you other atheists WAKE UP!!!

You know millions and millions of dollars is invested in SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestial Intelligence) to scan the skies with radio telescopes looking for any form of communication from other life forms in outer space to prove that we are not alone. An astronomically largely complex communication system exists in our own dna, yet still you say that there is no Creator or intelligence far superior to us. If we were to record the amount of encoded information in just one pinhead of dna into paperback books and stack them on top of each other, we would have a pile of books approx. 500 times higher than here to the moon (this is the result of a literal calculation). We will hang a man based on its irrefutable evidence. I call this intelligence the God of the Bible seeing as it can be cross referenced with extreme accurancy to the historical, geological and paleontological record. An enormous amount of oceanic marine fossils found on mountain tops - indicating the flood.

We have evidence that such information has evolved from simple chemical reactions. We do not need to posit an intelligence.

http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/jeb_enhanced/

wolfsbane wrote:

I can give you many examples - a dog, a man, a spider, a bird, a worm, a bacterium, a rose. I knew evolutionists see everything as a spectrum, but I thought some common sense prevailed.

Wolfsbane, at what point did a non-poodle give birth to a poodle?

Morbert

wolfsbane wrote: »

Now we just have to find out what the terms mean to each side.

You are using a concept adopted by William Dembski and the ID movement. It is unrelated to molecular biology or molecular information.

man of faith

Malty_T wrote: »

Man of faith,

There is no evidence in the slightest to suggest a global flood, none whatsoever.
I'll ask you this though if the world was flooded for 40 days and 40 nights then how the heck did the plants survive??

Matter forming from nothing?
Is typical appeal to false common sense..
What is nothing?
What is forming?

If we are buying into a major lie then it is up to the creationist to show us some evidence of the lie and to make some predictions based on that evidence as to how things should go.

Thus far:
Evidence : Zero.
Predictions : Nil.

Must try harder..

Science just needs to go back to the drawing board and re-evaluate the evidence, putting it into proper perspective. I think it is extremely unfair to just come up with an interpretation for the evidence based on a one-sided opinion that its impossible for God to exist, especially when you consider all the aspects of empirical science today. We have come absolute leaps and bounds in the last 150 years, and we have everything pretty crystal clear under the microscope. He came up with a hypothesis based on his opinion that there was no God. To cover himself, he made statements telling the scientific world to discard his theory if certain evidence was not found (such as macroevolutionary transistion fossils) and if irreducible complexity was discovered. Also keep in mind that even though this was what Darwin stated, who's to say that he is the absolute master mind of the entire human race. He was just another scientist.

Zombrex

man of faith wrote: »

Science just needs to go back to the drawing board and re-evaluate the evidence, putting it into proper perspective.

Why does science need to do that? Science seems to work pretty well, it is responsible for that computer you are using to type this, along with most other modern things you take for granted.

Why don't you need to go back to the Bible and re-evaluate the evidence for why you seem so convinced your interpretation of it is true?

man of faith wrote: »

I think it is extremely unfair to just come up with an interpretation for the evidence based on a one-sided opinion that its impossible for God to exist

He didn't, he came up with an interpretation for there not being a world wide Flood, an intepretation that fits with all the evidence.

What that means for the existence of the Christian god is up to Christians.

man of faith wrote: »

Also keep in mind that even though this was what Darwin stated, who's to say that he is the absolute master mind of the entire human race. He was just another scientist.

That is the point. The only people who seem to think people worship Darwin are Creationists.

Darwin was a scientist who put forward a scientific theory to explain biological life on Earth and presented the evidence for this theory.

And since he put forward his theories other scientists have determined through further testing that he was pretty much correct in his general idea, while being wrong is quite a few details.

Where is your scientific theory and your evidence?

Turtwig

man of faith wrote: »

Science just needs to go back to the drawing board and re-evaluate the evidence, putting it into proper perspective. I think it is extremely unfair to just come up with an interpretation for the evidence based on a one-sided opinion that its impossible for God to exist, especially when you consider all the aspects of empirical science today. We have come absolute leaps and bounds in the last 150 years, and we have everything pretty crystal clear under the microscope. He came up with a hypothesis based on his opinion that there was no God. To cover himself, he made statements telling the scientific world to discard his theory if certain evidence was not found (such as macroevolutionary transistion fossils) and if irreducible complexity was discovered. Also keep in mind that even though this was what Darwin stated, who's to say that he is the absolute master mind of the entire human race. He was just another scientist.

You don't seem to understand science. Science is a method of observing and understanding objective reality : It can neither prove/disprove things outside that reality e.g God, furgerargorocks, etc etc. Darwin's hypothesis was not based on the assumption of there being a God or no God. It was based on the observable reality of what he saw around him. With the discovery of genetics Darwin's theory could have been easily falsifiable yet such was the genius (or luck?:p) of the model that it still works perfectly.:)
Darwin may have been wrong about somethings but the since moddified model of evolution that biology depends on today is NOT wrong. In fact, I'd go out on a limb and say that evolution is far better understood than gravity.


Edit : Wicknight beat me

man of faith

Wicknight wrote: »

Why does science need to do that? Science seems to work pretty well, it is responsible for that computer you are using to type this, along with most other modern things you take for granted.

Why don't you need to go back to the Bible and re-evaluate the evidence for why you seem so convinced your interpretation of it is true?


He didn't, he came up with an interpretation for there not being a world wide Flood, an intepretation that fits with all the evidence.

What that means for the existence of the Christian god is up to Christians.



That is the point. The only people who seem to think people worship Darwin are Creationists.

Darwin was a scientist who put forward a scientific theory to explain biological life on Earth and presented the evidence for this theory.

And since he put forward his theories other scientists have determined through further testing that he was pretty much correct in his general idea, while being wrong is quite a few details.

Where is your scientific theory and your evidence?

You're asking the wrong guy. You need to redirect your question to a geological expert, he carries more weight than me. I'm just an observer like you, and I certainly don't claim to be an ultra intelligent scientist. But I do consider myself to be a competent and intelligent observer of the facts. From what I can see, they have evidence that is extremely compelling such as The Grand Canyon. I almost feel it is a futile discussion, as whatever I present to you, you're just gonna come back with an evolutionist biased argument as to why I've got it completely wrong or whatever.
Why don't you research what I am talking about. There is so much evidence and make an unbiased honest evaluation for yourself. It's your life - your the one who has to take the risk believing something contrary to The Bible. I don't have to walk in your shoes. Surely the complex messaging system of our own dna should be enough proof to say that there is phenomenal intelligence involved in our origins. How on earth can evolution explain this? They say the messaging system of dna is on three dimensions. Look it up if you don't believe me.

If you want flood evidence, here is some stuff on the grand canyons:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v15/i1/flood.asp

There is heaps of other stuff. Thats what google is for.
Cheers

man of faith

Wicknight wrote: »

Why does science need to do that? Science seems to work pretty well, it is responsible for that computer you are using to type this, along with most other modern things you take for granted.

The computer I am typing on was a remarkable achievement developed by man due to his ability to harness forces that just so happenned to be there. We can't really explain how these forces came to be there (electricity), they just were. Great genius' such as Edison persisted and persisted until finally, he was able to harness it. When you trace back to the very raw ingredients, it all comes back to something that we did not create. We just created things such as the rocket and the computer after we properly understood these incredible forces that existed.
The bible tells us that we were created in the express image and likeness of God. So when you understand God as the creator, you will understand why this ability is inherant within us. I am a professional artist. If anyone knows something about creativity, it should be me. Here is some of my work:

MSCH002 low res.jpg

man of faith

Wicknight wrote: »

Why does science need to do that? Science seems to work pretty well, it is responsible for that computer you are using to type this, along with most other modern things you take for granted.

Why don't you need to go back to the Bible and re-evaluate the evidence for why you seem so convinced your interpretation of it is true?


He didn't, he came up with an interpretation for there not being a world wide Flood, an intepretation that fits with all the evidence.

What that means for the existence of the Christian god is up to Christians.



That is the point. The only people who seem to think people worship Darwin are Creationists.

Darwin was a scientist who put forward a scientific theory to explain biological life on Earth and presented the evidence for this theory.

And since he put forward his theories other scientists have determined through further testing that he was pretty much correct in his general idea, while being wrong is quite a few details.

Where is your scientific theory and your evidence?

Just adding to my response from before:

- We created New York city, God created a miniature version called the living cell!! Same incredible complexity, infrastructure and activity!!!
Surely the magnitude of this goes far beyond any hypothesis or theory that we have come up with to try and work it out.

man of faith

wolfsbane wrote: »

lugha said:

I'm sorry if I gave that impression. No, I mean you to read it on the possibility of if being God's word. Reading to see if it will speak to you - as it would if it was God's word and you were sincerely seeking after Him.


The killer argument is two-fold:the witness of creation to your conscience; and the witness of the gospel to your conscience. Those two leave you without excuse - and if you apply yourself to them, they lead you to God and the salvation He gives to all who come to Him. The other religions may claim this - but the proof of the pudding is in the eating.



I agree - creation and our sense of ourselves as more than material beings tells us nothing about how God would respond to us. With only that witness, we would be merely wise to try and see what happens.

But we have a fuller witness - the gospel which God has sent to us. His word assures us that all who sincerely seek Him will find Him and that He will pardon every sinner who repents and trusts in Him. To suppress that witness is to be foolish to the ultimate.
John 6:28 Then they said to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.”
30 Therefore they said to Him, “What sign will You perform then, that we may see it and believe You? What work will You do? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’”
32 Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, Moses did not give you the bread from heaven, but My Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is He who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”
34 Then they said to Him, “Lord, give us this bread always.”
35 And Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. 40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

Great wisdom!

man of faith

Wicknight wrote: »

Yes but the Bible could be wrong? There are literally thousands of religious books, how did you determine that the Bible was the correct one given that you apparently don't know a whole lot before you did?
I choose to put my faith in the belief that it is not wrong for a number of very good reasons. Please keep reading.
God's spirit guides and directs you, even when you don't know Him. God says he wrote His laws on your heart and gave you a conscience that bears witness to it which is His word Romans 2:15 ie. You don't even have to be a Christian to know that stealing, murdering and lying is wrong - Where did that inherant conscience come from? He also says that He gave to each man the equal measure of faith Romans 12:3. He is the God of equal opportunity. Why would God create you and say ok, you're on your own now - you will just have to miraculously somehow try and figure this all out on your own?. Bible tells us that He will never leave us nor forsake us Hebrews 13:5-6. The fact that you just so happenned to find yourself asking these questions to some random guy on the internet about the mysteries of God is proof of this. When you accept Christ, you become a vessel of God's intention - to reach out to the rest of the world who He so desperately loves and wants to reunite Himself with. You wicknight are the pinnacle of His creation.

Or did you just decide to start believing the first religious book you came across?

Answered above. When Jesus departed He said that it is better that He leaves, as the one to come into the earth - The Holy Spirit, will guide you into all truth. God is omnipresent (He is everywhere). His Spirit wants to unite with us. That makes perfect sense if He is the Creator.

Such as Is the Bible the correct holy book to follow?

No other alleged holy book correlates so accurately with the historical, paleantological and geological record.

No other book has confirmed itself in fullfilled prophecy time and time again.

No other book contains such incredible numerical phenomenon. I'm not talking about the Bible code, as maybe this is debateable. But if you look at Bible numerics, you will find some incredible correlations with other passages of scripture in relation to numbers. Research Bible Numerics.

No other book even comes close to the amount of sold copies of The Bible. It is the worlds biggest selling book for very good reason.

The Bible talks about the existence of satan and his demons and the authority we have over them in the Name of Jesus Christ. I along with countless other Christians, have witnessed this first hand.

The Bible tells us of the power of God to heal. Why do you think Jesus had such a massive following when He walked the earth - healing miracles. There is an absolute countless number of healing miracles that have been performed in the Name of Jesus Christ. These are 100% provable.

You have determined this how exactly?

Faith. The same level that He gave to you Romans 12:3

The Bible tells us that it is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen Hebrews 11:1.

You develop and grow this faith the more you hear God's word
2 Thessalonians 1:3 and Romans 10:17

Heres a link:
http://www.bible-knowledge.com/What-is-faith.html

man of faith

Wicknight wrote: »

Yes but the Bible could be wrong? There are literally thousands of religious books, how did you determine that the Bible was the correct one given that you apparently don't know a whole lot before you did?

Or did you just decide to start believing the first religious book you came across?



Such as Is the Bible the correct holy book to follow?


You have determined this how exactly?

wolfsbane wrote: »

I have a problem about how the fossil record is interpreted. The snapshots are linked together by the interpreter - they are not like a video. The sequence is in the mind of the beholder.

No doubt much of the evolutionist interpretation is honest conjecture, a serious attempt to fit the evidence to their general theory. Some, however, is mere propaganda and/or publicity, as this article points out:
'Ida' Fossil Hype Went Too Far
http://www.livescience.com/culture/090520-ida-fossil-hype.html

Don't forget the pig's tooth

man of faith

monosharp wrote: »

Man of Faith watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBoqKF52FU8

Its a video by a Christian about creationism.

Did you know that the book of Genesis also contains the passage of scripture that talks about Noah and the flood and more importantly talks about the Covenant that God made with Abraham which is essential for the eternal life offerred by God to people so that they can even become a Christian - an heir according to the promise through the promised Messiah Jesus Christ. So Jesus Christ is God fullfilling his obligation in accordance with this Covenant - the most powerful form of agreement there is. Mankind just need to access it by faith and receive it. Not by anything they have done or whether or not they deserve it - they must exercise faith to receive it.
So this man who produced this video is claiming to be a Christian, yet he is denying the literal interpretation of the same book Genesis (Author being Moses) whom God used to deliver the Israelites out of Egypt and also gave the Ten Commandments too. So he may think that Moses got God's inspired scripture in some parts of Genesis correct, and other parts got it plain wrong. I DON'T THINK SO!!!! :eek::eek::eek: More than likely he just understands very little about the roots of his alleged Christianity!

You know The Bible tells us that it is by grace through faith that we are saved Ephesians 2:8. God's promise to give eternal life to all who accept Jesus Christ His Son, rests on the Covenant that He established with Abraham, as recorded in Genesis. If he is denying parts of the very book by which He calls himself a Christian, a statement of his faith, then I have serious doubts that this man even is a Christian. I will not be his judge, this is up to God.:)

monosharp

man of faith wrote: »

You know millions and millions of dollars is invested in SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestial Intelligence) to scan the skies with radio telescopes looking for any form of communication from other life forms in outer space to prove that we are not alone.

What has this got to do with creationism or a deity ?

An astronomically largely complex communication system exists in our own dna,

What has this got to do with creationism or a deity ?

yet still you say that there is no Creator or intelligence far superior to us.

What has this got to do with evolution or creationism ? There are many people of many different religions who believe wholeheartedly in evolution and their god/s.

Many scientists who actually work on evolutionary biology are religious.

Your point is nonsense. Atheism does not mean evolution and Christian does not mean creationist.

This is the creationism thread, please go somewhere else to talk about atheism.

If we were to record the amount of encoded information in just one pinhead of dna into paperback books and stack them on top of each other, we would have a pile of books approx. 500 times higher than here to the moon (this is the result of a literal calculation).

And the same amount of information would fit on a standard DVD.

Whats your point ?

We will hang a man based on its irrefutable evidence.

Which shows you know nothing about the legal ramifications of DNA either.

No one is convicted on the basis on DNA evidence alone.

I call this intelligence the God of the Bible seeing as it can be cross referenced with extreme accurancy to the historical, geological and paleontological record. An enormous amount of oceanic marine fossils found on mountain tops - indicating the flood.

You have given no examples of intelligent and you have given no reason to choose the god of the bible over Buddha or the tooth fairy.

monosharp

wolfsbane wrote: »

It seems evolutionists must be pedants, then. Most people, including scientists, know what is meant be a 'good' bacteria and a 'bad' one. But for the pedants, let me spell it out - good for the human body, and bad for the human body.

Lurkers here should note this attempt to evade creationist argument rather than address it.

And what about the millions of other types of bacteria which have no effect bad or good on the human body ? How do they fit into good or bad ?

And there has been no argument, there has been childish nonsense.

man of faith

And the same amount of information would fit on a standard DVD.

Whats your point ?


What do you mean by what is my point? I have just brought to your attention that scientists have proven that it is a highly complex messaging system which sends coded information and signals, much like computer programming code, only far far more advanced. The very instructions for the growth of every part of our body. Even if it could fit on a floppy disk, it is still comprehensive proof of intelliegent design.

Just forget about responded Monosharp. You are just way too rude and condescending. From now on, I am just going to ignore you.

man of faith

Ian McCormack (Ex Atheist):
http://www.aglimpseofeternity.org/

Brian Melvin. Apparantly this is very good for atheists to watch as Brian used to be a militant ex-atheist:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piHZkKFdsFc&feature=related

Can I prove that these man actually died?
Answer: No. It doesn't mean it didn't happen and that there is no proof available.

Watch it and decide whether or not you believe them to be telling the truth. If you instantly assume that is all lies, then you are not viewing it with an open mind. You would be taking a completely biased view without even giving it a chance. There would have to be medical records to back up what they are claiming. If you contacted them or researched it, I'm sure you would be able to find it, as it would of undoubtedly been requested before.

Zombrex

man of faith wrote: »

You're asking the wrong guy.

Apparently

man of faith wrote: »

I'm just an observer like you, and I certainly don't claim to be an ultra intelligent scientist.

You do claim to have been able to figure out the truth of which, if any, human religion is true. Though you seem some what cagey about how you did that, while perfectly happy to attack established scientific theory as guess work.

man of faith wrote: »

I almost feel it is a futile discussion, as whatever I present to you, you're just gonna come back with an evolutionist biased argument as to why I've got it completely wrong or whatever.

If everytime you put forwards something someone quickly points out the flaws in it at what point do you think maybe you have got it completely wrong?

You seem very confident of your own correctness, despite repeatedly stating you don't actually understand very well these subjects.

man of faith wrote: »

Why don't you research what I am talking about.

I have.

man of faith wrote: »

Surely the complex messaging system of our own dna should be enough proof to say that there is phenomenal intelligence involved in our origins.

Why? Simply because you lack the imagination to understand it in any other terms that "God did it"

Given the mistakes and inefficiencies that litter biological life it seems a bizarre conclusion to say that intelligence created it. Where as evolution explains it perfectly.

man of faith wrote: »

How on earth can evolution explain this?

Very easily.

How on Earth can Creationists explain it? They don't, they say God did it for "unknown" reasons, which is the cop out of the century.

man of faith wrote: »

The computer I am typing on was a remarkable achievement developed by man due to his ability to harness forces that just so happenned to be there. We can't really explain how these forces came to be there (electricity), they just were. Great genius' such as Edison persisted and persisted until finally, he was able to harness it. When you trace back to the very raw ingredients, it all comes back to something that we did not create. We just created things such as the rocket and the computer after we properly understood these incredible forces that existed.

And yet you feel confident in ridiculing the scientific standards that lead to all this as merely guess work?

man of faith wrote: »

The bible tells us that we were created in the express image and likeness of God.

And you know the Bible is true because .... ?

lugha

man of faith wrote: »

So Jesus Christ is God fullfilling his obligation in accordance with this Covenant - the most powerful form of agreement there is. Mankind just need to access it by faith and receive it. Not by anything they have done or whether or not they deserve it - they must exercise faith to receive it.

Might I ask what exactly do you understand by faith in a Christian context? My own impression, and the one I get from reading what you wrote, it that is about a willingness to accept something to be true without demanding that evidence be presented. An illustration of this would be the story of doubting Thomas. However other Christians here insist that this is an incorrect interpretation, that faith is more akin to trust. I.e. Doubting Thomas should not have doubted the resurrection, not because there is merit in unquestionably accepting it, but because he should have trusted the word of Jesus. Is this your understanding and have I misunderstood you?

lugha

[QUOTE=wolfsbane;62683085
The killer argument is two-fold:the witness of creation to your conscience; and the witness of the gospel to your conscience. Those two leave you without excuse - and if you apply yourself to them, they lead you to God and the salvation He gives to all who come to Him. The other religions may claim this - but the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
[/QUOTE]
Regrettably, when I read some of your posts, my first reaction if often to wonder if I misinterpret what you are saying and I suspect that may again be the case here. Anyway, my understanding of what you are saying is, to paraphrase, “yes many religions do claim to be the one true faith and if you were to ask a follower of any of these they would all insist that all other religions are wrong, mine is the real deal. But it is all of these that are wrong, mine is the real deal". I am sure you can appreciate that this is not an entirely satisfactory answer.
As for your pudding eating verification suggestion, yes that would be telling, if there was a spiritual fulfillment to be found in followers of Christianity that was demonstrably absent in other faiths. I am not aware of any evidence of this. Indeed growing up in a Catholic community which included some Muslims, I was always struck by the fact that their faith seemed more important to the Muslims. So where is this pudding of which you speak?

Turtwig

man of faith wrote: »

Surely the complex messaging system of our own dna should be enough proof to say that there is phenomenal intelligence involved in our origins.

Perhaps if the DNA were perfect it would be a sign as of a phenomenal intelligence. However, considering that it's responsible for cancer, other diseases and that 98% of it is regarded as junk to this current generation. (Awaiting evolution it seems:rolleyes:) I'd wouldn't place my house on it being a sign of intelligence.

How on earth can evolution explain this?

Btw, Creationists generally explain this by something called micro evolution.:)

Turtwig

man of faith wrote: »

Ian McCormack (Ex Atheist):
http://www.aglimpseofeternity.org/

Brian Melvin. Apparantly this is very good for atheists to watch as Brian used to be a militant ex-atheist:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piHZkKFdsFc&feature=related

Can I prove that these man actually died?
Answer: No. It doesn't mean it didn't happen and that there is no proof available.

Watch it and decide whether or not you believe them to be telling the truth. If you instantly assume that is all lies, then you are not viewing it with an open mind. You would be taking a completely biased view without even giving it a chance. There would have to be medical records to back up what they are claiming. If you contacted them or researched it, I'm sure you would be able to find it, as it would of undoubtedly been requested before.

Actually if you are to watch it with an open mind then you need to be open to possibility that personal experiences can easily be confabulated (unintentionally too). Ask yourself have you ever had a dream that makes perfect since?? Also, do you even hear about the ex theists who had these NDEs and realised...uh oh something missing here? Or those people who don't remember or experiencing anything?

Why would an omnipotent, omniscient being only appear to a minute insignificant percentage of the general population when their mental states are clearly compromised? He's really working hard to make himself obscure isn't He?

Morbert

man of faith wrote: »

Just adding to my response from before:

- We created New York city, God created a miniature version called the living cell!! Same incredible complexity, infrastructure and activity!!!
Surely the magnitude of this goes far beyond any hypothesis or theory that we have come up with to try and work it out.

It doesn't. Abiogenesis is a field still open to competing theories, but the development of biological complexity has been explained with evolutionary biology.

That do you mean by what is my point? I have just brought to your attention that scientists have proven that it is a highly complex messaging system which sends coded information and signals, much like computer programming code, only far far more advanced. The very instructions for the growth of every part of our body. Even if it could fit on a floppy disk, it is still comprehensive proof of intelliegent design.

It seems that you have now given up debate and are just reiterating wrong statements. Biological complexity is not proof of intelligent design because we know through research* that biological complexity can emerge through evolutionary mechanisms.

* a small sample:
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/jeb_enhanced/
http://www.la-press.com/journal.php?pa=description&journal_id=17

monosharp

man of faith wrote: »

What do you mean by what is my point? I have just brought to your attention that scientists have proven that it is a highly complex messaging system which sends coded information and signals, much like computer programming code, only far far more advanced.

So god was only 'far far more advanced' then us. So give it about 100 years and we'll be smarter then god. Nice.

The very instructions for the growth of every part of our body. Even if it could fit on a floppy disk, it is still comprehensive proof of intelliegent design.

How do you come to that conclusion ? We have a naturalistic explanation for it, why do we need the supernatural ?

Just forget about responded Monosharp. You are just way too rude and condescending. From now on, I am just going to ignore you.

Oh please save me. I want to become one with Lord Buddha Thor Jesus