Gravity

[Lunar]

(treeoflife)
I can test gravity, right now, at my desk, and I can see it proved over and over again.
Yes, you can produce evidence for the theory of gravity very easily. That's why it's accepted as scientific fact - because it's a theory which has never been falsified, with a huge amount of evidence supporting it, and whose predictions have always been met.However, you do not observe gravity itself - you observe the effects of gravity. Nobody has ever directly observed gravity itself. They have observed objects falling, but that is what gravity does, not what it is.(treeoflife)
Biblical creation is also a theory. Do you mind if i compare it to gravity in efforts to prove to you that it is true? Or would you find the comparison nonsensical like we find the comparison of the Theory of Evolution to gravity nonsensical?
Actually, I would mind if you compared them, because biblical creation doesn't meet the requirements for a scientific theory. It's not testable, it's not falsifiable, and it doesn't make predictions.The comparison between the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution is made because both of them satisfy these criterion. That's why it isn't nonsensical - they both fall under the category of a scientific theory, whereas biblical creation does not.The distinction that you seem to want to make is that gravity has a lot of evidence supporting it and evolution does not. If you want to dispute that evolutionary theory is fact, then you can argue against the evidence for it, but I imagine you will have about as much luck with that as other creationists have.

 

[treeoflife]

(Lunar;51602)
The comparison between the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution is made because both of them satisfy these criterion. That's why it isn't nonsensical - they both fall under the category of a scientific theory, whereas biblical creation does not.
And, that's your deception. It is what you believe, in faith, and by the brainwashing I have spoken of before. I know it's offensive that I call it brainwashing, but it's really the best word to describe what it is that you believe, and how you believe it. God's Word calls it "strong delusion", so if I were going to use two words instead of one (brainwashing), that is what I would say. Needless to say, I disagree with you completely.God's Word and Biblical creation have not and will not be disproven... only proven, when approached by a truly scientific mind. Simply because God created science, and anything that goes contrary to His Word cannot be true. If you believe something contrary to the Word of God, you have believed a lie, and it certainly can't be truly scientific.Gravity, like Biblical creation are theories. You can only deny them for so long before they catch up with you and the harsh reality of believing something contrary finally crushes you. Jesus said, in John 5:46-47, "If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say" Moses wrote the book of Genesis, those were "his words" on the matter of our Genesis (our beginning), and one delusion that people believe is that there is any other way that we came into being other than the Biblical account given by Moses through God's Word, in Genesis. This is often quite enough of a delusion to keep such a person from believing on Jesus, God's Son, for the Words He has spoken giving us eternal life. It is a foundational belief to know where we came from, because consequently it speaks of where we are going.Jesus said, on the matter of Himself being the Rock of our salvation... whoever falls on this rock will be broken (spiritually, and ready for renewal by God)... but whoever the rock falls on will be ground into powder (utterly destroyed beyond hope of repair). Many Evolutionists, who in return reject God's Son, will in fact, be ground to powder... when gravity, like God's Word, brings the Rock down on top of them and grinds them to powder. It would be much better to fall on Him, and be broken. He will restore your broken bones, and you will be stronger than ever.The Theory of Evolution, like Santa Clause, is a fairytale with some facts mixed in to it to give it the appearence of being legit. Just enough facts in with the fairytale to deceive those who hear it, and who want to believe anything contrary to God's clearly spoken Word.Two choices: Be broken on the ROCK, and have Him restore you... or allow gravity to catch up with you and have the ROCK grind you into powder. Either way, we are coming to an end. I suggest the former.

 

[Lunar]

(treeoflife;51618)
And, that's your deception. It is what you believe, in faith, and by the brainwashing I have spoken of before. I know it's offensive that I call it brainwashing, but it's really the best word to describe what it is that you believe, and how you believe it. God's Word calls it "strong delusion", so if I were going to use two words instead of one (brainwashing), that is what I would say. Needless to say, I disagree with you completely.
It's not brainwashing. It's simply analyzing the content of each claim and seeing whether it fits the criterion for a scientific theory.Both gravity and evolution make predictions about future phenomenon which we can observe, and it provides a model for a wide range of naturalistic behavior. Biblical creation doesn't make predictions about the creation of future universes, nor does it provide a model for behavior outside of one specific event. So that's strike one against it.Both gravity and evolution can be falsified. If we were to observe an instance in which an object floated in midair for no apparent reason, for example, or if we were to find that the human genome more closely represented that of a fish than a chimpanzee, then those could be conditions for falsifying those respective theories. Creationism, however, is not falsifiable, so that's strike two.Similarly, both gravity and evolution can be tested through experimental procedures based on observable evidence. We observe physical behavior every day, and we have a huge amount of data concerning the fossil record, DNA, and specific observed instances of speciation. However, how are we supposed to put the biblical account of creation to the test? The creator himself obviously can't be observed, and the seven-day account of creation as depicted in the bible has been repudiated time and time again.You can believe what you want about the truth of evolution or biblical creation. But it's a matter of objective fact that, based on the criterion by which a scientific theory is defined, evolution and gravity are scientific theories, and biblical creation is not. Sorry.(treeoflife)
God's Word and Biblical creation have not and will not be disproven... only proven, when approached by a truly scientific mind. Simply because God created science, and anything that goes contrary to His Word cannot be true. If you believe something contrary to the Word of God, you have believed a lie, and it certainly can't be truly scientific.
You're way ahead of yourself here. I'll accept the biblical account of creation if it's in accordance with rigorous science, not the other way around.(treeoflife)
The Theory of Evolution, like Santa Clause, is a fairytale with some facts mixed in to it to give it the appearence of being legit. Just enough facts in with the fairytale to deceive those who hear it, and who want to believe anything contrary to God's clearly spoken Word.
You say this constantly, but I've never once seen you actually dispute the data about evolution. What about evolution is wrong? What do you say about the numerous transitional fossils we've found in the fossil record, like the Tiktaalik or Ambulocetus? Why do we find so many similarities in DNA structure between organisms? Why do we find vestigial traits with no apparent function, like the appendix in the human, or undeveloped hind legs in some species of whales? Why are there so many instances of imperfect design in organisms, like the high incredibly high infant mortality rate universal among mammals, or the fact that so many humans need glasses just to see properly? Why do we observe instances of speciation? Why have all of the examples of irreducible complexity, like the eye or the bacterial flagellum, been repudiated?That's just for starters.(treeoflife)
Two choices: Be broken on the ROCK, and have Him restore you... or allow gravity to catch up with you and have the ROCK grind you into powder. Either way, we are coming to an end. I suggest the former.
Spare me your fearmongering. I'm not impressed by your tendency to resort to threats as a method of convincing people. Is intimidation the best God can muster?

 

[Jackie D]

I may be opening a can of worms here but I must say something regarding the findings of science and the biblical account of creation. First and foremost, just because the book of Genisis states a 6 day period of creation by God does not mean that it was literally 6 24hr periods to create all that is on earth and the universe. So for science or those who don't want to accept "creationism" (by the way I loathe isms)because some claim it was literally 6 days and not 6,000 yrs is unfair to do on the part of those who choose science over a belief that there is an actual creator who put everything into place long long before man came onto the scene.It is my belief that measurement of time was given to man to simplify things for him and not to be taken literally in some instances, such as the period of time it took for creation. Although I also believe that the Lord could have easily created it all in a 24hr period and still have left many questions unaswered.I don't have a clue about most science and don't care to. Just as I believe that there are many unbelievers who come here not having a clue about God or Christianity except what they have experienced in the distasteful, therefore all Christians and Christianity must be distasteful. And many Christians find science distasteful because of the agenda that much of science is used to discredit God and turn people away from Him to their belief that we ourselves are the gods and the earth is our throne. The intelligence of science, scientists and those who believe science over a creator is probably the most ignorant group of people I have known because they live by intellect and ignore most spiritual matters because it just doesn't seem to fit into logic. For many if there is no logic to it, it is inconsequential, so they miss out on some really important things in life, things that make life even more fulfilling. (please folks don't take what I just said as a personal attack on anyone, I just speak it how I see it as I see most in this forum do) There are some such as myself who are open to believing and understanding that science is a necessary thing because it paints and even stronger picture of the magnificance of GOD. Science is a wonderful and astounding thing and I for one cannot stand against it. Science definitely plays a major role in our world and it was given to us by God and I for one am amazed by some of science, its discoveries and proofs. blessings

 

[Lunar]

(Jackie D;51743)
I don't have a clue about most science and don't care to. Just as I believe that there are many unbelievers who come here not having a clue about God or Christianity except what they have experienced in the distasteful, therefore all Christians and Christianity must be distasteful.
Since you've just pointed out a way in which you believe not familiarizing yourself with material can lead to an erroneous conclusion, maybe you should familiarize yourself with science before criticizing it. You think it's a mistake for people to find Christianity distasteful because of limited knowledge; don't you think you're making the same mistake when, without "having a clue" about most science, you criticize it anyway?Also, I hope you know that many atheists, both on this board and elsewhere, are perfectly knowledgeable about Christianity. It's not for a lack of information that they reach the conclusions they do.(Jackie D)
And many Christians find science distasteful because of the agenda that much of science is used to discredit God and turn people away from Him to their belief that we ourselves are the gods and the earth is our throne.
Oh, please. Science aims at the truth, not some subversive, organized vendetta against religion. There are plenty of religious scientists who reach the same conclusions secular ones do; it's only a small handful of fringe loonies like Kent Hovind that make it appear as though there's any controversy over issues like the age of the earth or evolution. How can you look at the fascinating research these people do and see nothing but an attempt to make men into gods? Is human knowledge that offensive to you?(Jackie D)
The intelligence of science, scientists and those who believe science over a creator is probably the most ignorant group of people I have known because they live by intellect and ignore most spiritual matters because it just doesn't seem to fit into logic. For many if there is no logic to it, it is inconsequential, so they miss out on some really important things in life, things that make life even more fulfilling. (please folks don't take what I just said as a personal attack on anyone, I just speak it how I see it as I see most in this forum do)
So you think belief in God is illogical?(Jackie D)
There are some such as myself who are open to believing and understanding that science is a necessary thing because it paints and even stronger picture of the magnificance of GOD.
But you just said you didn't understand it.

 

[Jackie D]

Since you've just pointed out a way in which you believe not familiarizing yourself with material can lead to an erroneous conclusion, maybe you should familiarize yourself with science before criticizing it.
I did not criticize science, I criticized the people pushing the sciences to negate God. Such as is highly noted in this forum.
You think it's a mistake for people to find Christianity distasteful because of limited knowledge; don't you think you're making the same mistake when, without "having a clue" about most science, you criticize it anyway?
not really since I must assume by the general population of unbelievers and posts in this forum that ya'll have painted a pretty clear picture of how much of people pushing the sciences views the Creator.
Also, I hope you know that many atheists, both on this board and elsewhere, are perfectly knowledgeable about Christianity. It's not for a lack of information that they reach the conclusions they do.
the same can be said about the Christian world regarding atheists.
Oh, please. Science aims at the truth, not some subversive, organized vendetta against religion.
I didn't say that at all...please don't put words in my mouth. And there is a difference between (IMO) believing in God and religion. Christians aim at the truth as well....and the same things are done to us by atheists and those who put science over a Creator.
So you think belief in God is illogical?
no I think that not believing in God is illogical
you just said you didn't understand it.
I don't understand a lot of it. Why would I pretend to? I don't understand every thing about God either, does that mean I cannot find Him amazing? My posting in this thread was an attempt at diplomacy and perhaps finding a middle ground that we can all walk on and discuss civily...be blessed

 

[Shornaal]

(Jackie D;51774)
no I think that not believing in God is illogical
Your God or any God?

 

[Jackie D]

There is only one God.

 

[Shornaal]

(Jackie D;51787)
There is only one God.
Agreed, praise be Horus!

 

[Jackie D]

Horusby Stephanie CassThe name "Horus" is a general catchall for multiple deities, the most famous of whom is Harseisis (Heru-sa-Aset) or Horus-son-of-Isis (sometimes called Horus the Younger) who was conceived after the death of his father, Osiris, and who later avenged him. In all the Horus deities the traits of kingship, sky and solar symbology, and victory reoccur. As the prototype of the earthly king, there were as many Horus gods as there were rulers of Egypt, if not more. The oldest of the Horus gods is appropriately named Horus the Elder (Heru-ur), and was especially venerated in pre-Dynastic Upper Egypt along with Hathor. In this very ancient form, Horus is also a creator god, the falcon who flew up at the beginning of time. The pre-Pharaohnic rulers of Upper Egypt were considered "shemsu-Heru" or "followers of Horus", and the original Horus is himself considered in some myths to be the brother of Seth and Osiris, second-born of the five children of Geb and Nut (Osiris, Horus, Seth, Isis, Nephthys). Horus the Elder's city was Letopolis, and his eyes were thought to be the sun and moon. When these two heavenly bodies are invisible (as on the night of the new moon) he goes blind and takes the name Mekhenty-er-irty, "He who has no eyes". When he recovers them, he becomes Khenty-irty, "He who has eyes". A warrior-god armed with a sword, Horus could be especially dangerous to those around him in his vision-deprived state, and during one battle in particular he managed to not only knock off the heads of his enemies but of the other deities fighting alongside him, thus plunging the world into immediate confusion that was only relieved when his eyes returned. Other notable Horus gods are the previously mentioned Harseisis, as well as Horus of Behdet (sometimes called simply Behdety) who was represented as a winged sun disk, Anhur (a form of Horus the Elder and Shu), Horakhety (Ra-Heru-akhety) who was a syncretism of Ra and Horus, and Harpokrates (Heru-pa-khered) or Horus the Child. In the form of Harpokrates, Horus is the danger-beset son of Isis with one finger to his lips, signifying his childish nature (also evident in his princely sidelock and naked status). Harpokrates represented not only the royal heir, but also the newborn sun. Horus deities are frequently depicted as hawks or hawk-headed men, though some are represented as fully human. The pharaoh was considered to be the Living Horus, the temporal stand-in for Horus in the earthly domain. As the opponent of Seth (who, though initially an Upper Egyptian deity himself, later came to represent not only Lower Egypt but the desert surrounding Egypt), Horus is alternately a brother vying for the throne and unification of Egypt (Horus the Elder), or a royal heir come to reclaim his inheritance (Horus the Younger). Horus can be seen at the top of the serekh of early kings, though in very rare cases his place was usurped by Set (Peribsen, Dynasty 2) or even shared with him (Khasekhemwy, Dynasty 2). Horus is also depicted on the famous Narmer palette along with Bat, an earlier form of Hathor. A passage from the Coffin Texts (passage 148) sums up Horus in his own words: "I am Horus, the great Falcon upon the ramparts of the house of him of the hidden name. My flight has reached the horizon. I have passed by the gods of Nut. I have gone further than the gods of old. Even the most ancient bird could not equal my very first flight. I have removed my place beyond the powers of Set, the foe of my father Osiris. No other god could do what I have done. I have brought the ways of eternity to the twilight of the morning. I am unique in my flight. My wrath will be turned against the enemy of my father Osiris and I will put him beneath my feet in my name of 'Red Cloak'." "Myth and Symbol in Ancient Egypt" by R.T. Rundle Clark, p. 216 The name of Horus in hieroglyphs.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Shornaal, this is a Christian site and we believe in God the Almighty, Father of Christ and sender of the Holy Spirit.Are you here to ask sincere questions regarding Christianity and Faith in Christ? I haven't seen it thus far so I must assume you are here for other reasons, reasons that you have not been invited here to indulge in. Kindly respect the rules of this forum. Thank you

 

[Shornaal]

(Jackie D;51793)
Shornaal, this is a Christian site and we believe in God the Almighty, Father of Christ and sender of the Holy Spirit.Are you here to ask sincere questions regarding Christianity and Faith in Christ? I haven't seen it thus far so I must assume you are here for other reasons, reasons that you have not been invited here to indulge in. Kindly respect the rules of this forum. Thank you
The reason I'm here is to find God.So far though from what I've gleaned from this site everyone here seems to have a different opinion from the rest and see theirview as the right one.Also I've been trying to find out what makes the christian God the only true one, but so far every argument or evidence works for most religions.This keeps me from taking the step to become a full christian but if I could find the answer why christianity is the one true way I'd give my life to God.I apologise if my posts have been harsh or sarcastic.

 

[Jackie D]

(Shornaal;51795)
The reason I'm here is to find God.So far though from what I've gleaned from this site everyone here seems to have a different opinion from the rest and see theirview as the right one.Also I've been trying to find out what makes the christian God the only true one, but so far every argument or evidence works for most religions.This keeps me from taking the step to become a full christian but if I could find the answer why christianity is the one true way I'd give my life to God.
may I suggest getting a bible and reading and praying if you can. sometimes it isn't through people that our answers are given. However, I will help you as much as I can...be blessed

 

[eternalarcadia]

(Shornaal;51795)
The reason I'm here is to find God.So far though from what I've gleaned from this site everyone here seems to have a different opinion from the rest and see theirview as the right one.Also I've been trying to find out what makes the christian God the only true one, but so far every argument or evidence works for most religions.This keeps me from taking the step to become a full christian but if I could find the answer why christianity is the one true way I'd give my life to God.I apologise if my posts have been harsh or sarcastic.
To my knowledge, Jesus was the only one to claim he was actually one with God and that he had a kingdom not of this world. All other religions teach that you can either become a god, work yourself up to godhood, or do certain tasks so that god will eventually love you. On the contrary, Christianity says that God has already loved us, and like a father or mother rushes to their children's aid when they get lost in a convenience store or public place - God comes to his peoples aid.in addition, there is no other prophet which loved his people so much that he would offer himself as a sacrifice and subject himself to to one of the most inhumane and brutal forms of execution.

 

[Lunar]

(Jackie D)
no I think that not believing in God is illogical
So now I'm confused. When you posted thisJackie D)
For many if there is no logic to it, it is inconsequential, so they miss out on some really important things in life, things that make life even more fulfilling
it sounds as though you are criticizing atheists for being closed-minded because they will only accept some beliefs that are logical, and that theists accept beliefs that aren't logical, which makes their lives fulfilling. What are the illogical beliefs that atheists's lives are less fulfilled in the absence of?(eternalarcadia;51823)
All other religions teach that you can either become a god, work yourself up to godhood, or do certain tasks so that god will eventually love you. On the contrary, Christianity says that God has already loved us, and like a father or mother rushes to their children's aid when they get lost in a convenience store or public place - God comes to his peoples aid.
Christianity is not unique in this regard. Look into Pure Land Buddhism. You'll find that it's remarkably similar to Christianity, insofar as, rather than through acts, you are saved by faith in a divine figure (Amitabha Buddha) who has vowed to save all beings, and has created a heavenly realm where these saved beings will reside. According to Buddhist doctrine, bodhisattvas like the past lives of Amitabha Buddha have a love for all beings that drives them to return to this world and aid them in salvation.You should study some other religions more closely. They're not all about becoming gods. Many sects of Buddhism don't even focus on a godlike figure at all.Also, even if Christianity were a unique religion, that wouldn't make it true. I could make up a unique religion right now if I wanted, but it wouldn't be true.(eternalarcadia)
in addition, there is no other prophet which loved his people so much that he would offer himself as a sacrifice and subject himself to to one of the most inhumane and brutal forms of execution.
Martyrdom for a religious cause is commonplace. Ignatius of Antioch was dying (no pun intended) to be thrown to the beasts so he could be martyred (and being ripped apart by lions is probably at least as unpleasant as dying on the cross). And we've all lost count of the number of radical Muslims who are sacrificing themselves for their religious agenda. It's not like Jesus wasn the only religious figure in history who was willing to endure torture.

 

[Hawkins]

(Shornaal;51795)
Also I've been trying to find out what makes the christian God the only true one, but so far every argument or evidence works for most religions.
All religions are about one thing - Faith.But not all religions are actually addressing faith itself, they are the false religions as they don't know what they are talking about. Buddhism is a religion, yet it never said that you need faith, it advocates cause and effect. Faith is never addressed, yet you need faith to believe what's said.While Christianity is one of the few directly says that "All you need is faith". To me, it's the only religion which not only directly addresses faith, it addresses it so well that it qualifies it to be the only true religion.On the other hand, as your knowledge about Christianity grows, you may find that Christianity is not just a religion, it's where the Truth is.

 

[Jackie D]

(Hawkins;51829)
All religions are about one thing - Faith.
in another thread the discussion of Christianity came up as being religion. I know that many define it as religion. The truth to me though is that being Christian (in-Christ) cannot be carried out by being religious. IMO....(Hawkins;51829)
While Christianity is one of the few directly says that "All you need is faith". To me, it's the only religion which not only directly addresses faith, it addresses it so well that it qualifies it to be the only true religion.
again calling Christianity religion takes away from the fact that faith in Christ is what saves us and we move it to works because being religious is acts or works.(Hawkins;51829)
On the other hand, as your knowledge about Christianity grows, you may find that Christianity is not just a religion, it's where the Truth is.
The Truth is where Christ is. Religion cannot carry THE TRUTH any more than man is capable of being truthful 100% of the time. As man loves to add his two cents and color truth just a tiny bit to suit an agenda. Religions are man made, Christ was not and is not of man therefore, why would we consider turning Him into religion?By the way Hawkins, my post is not about negating what you have said, please don't take afront to any part of my post as it is not personal...

 

[eternalarcadia]

(Lunar;51826)
So now I'm confused. When you posted this:it sounds as though you are criticizing atheists for being closed-minded because they will only accept some beliefs that are logical, and that theists accept beliefs that aren't logical, which makes their lives fulfilling. What are the illogical beliefs that atheists's lives are less fulfilled in the absence of?Christianity is not unique in this regard. Look into Pure Land Buddhism. You'll find that it's remarkably similar to Christianity, insofar as, rather than through acts, you are saved by faith in a divine figure (Amitabha Buddha) who has vowed to save all beings, and has created a heavenly realm where these saved beings will reside. According to Buddhist doctrine, bodhisattvas like the past lives of Amitabha Buddha have a love for all beings that drives them to return to this world and aid them in salvation.You should study some other religions more closely. They're not all about becoming gods. Many sects of Buddhism don't even focus on a godlike figure at all.Also, even if Christianity were a unique religion, that wouldn't make it true. I could make up a unique religion right now if I wanted, but it wouldn't be true.Martyrdom for a religious cause is commonplace. Ignatius of Antioch was dying (no pun intended) to be thrown to the beasts so he could be martyred (and being ripped apart by lions is probably at least as unpleasant as dying on the cross). And we've all lost count of the number of radical Muslims who are sacrificing themselves for their religious agenda. It's not like Jesus wasn the only religious figure in history who was willing to endure torture.
Could you think of one other prophet who claimed repeatedly to be one with God and to be the truth and the life?Who else offered to single-handedly take away the sin of the world?Other religions teach as well that you have to do things by yourself to save yourself from hell or from making God mad. With Christianity, God already loves us, and He himself has saved us from hell. He already did it for us. He took the judgement upon himself.By the way, mormonism is one example which teaches that you can become a God.

 

[Lunar]

(eternalarcadia;51878)
Could you think of one other prophet who claimed repeatedly to be one with God and to be the truth and the life?Who else offered to single-handedly take away the sin of the world?Other religions teach as well that you have to do things by yourself to save yourself from hell or from making God mad. With Christianity, God already loves us, and He himself has saved us from hell. He already did it for us. He took the judgement upon himself.
Did you read my post? I already said, just because Christianity is the only religion to claim this or that doesn't make it true. Uniqueness =/= truth.Also, you clearly didn't read what I said about Amitabha Buddha either. He does almost exactly what you just described.You also demonstrate an ignorance of the very conceptual space of other religious traditions. Buddhism doesn't even concern itself with a particular god, so of course none of their major figures would claim to be one with god. And if you think Christianity is the only religion that posits a divine figure with an innately benevolent character, you're just dead wrong. For starters, both Judaism and Islam believe in the same god, so...(eternalarcadia)
By the way, mormonism is one example which teaches that you can become a God.
Again, read what I'm saying if you're going to bother to respond. I did not say that no religions were about becoming gods. I said that not all religions were about becoming gods, which is true. I know what Mormonism teaches. I also know Mormonism is a fringe religion that is in no way representative of the state of religion as a whole.

 

[treeoflife]

(Lunar;51725)
That's just for starters.Spare me your fearmongering. I'm not impressed by your tendency to resort to threats as a method of convincing people. Is intimidation the best God can muster?
Certainly not. The conclusion of those threats is the best He can muster.Some are saved by compassion... and some by fear. Those who are saved by fear must learn compassion. Those who are saved by compassion must learn fear. Which will it be for you? God knows. But you must be willing.