goku Posted January 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 everything the KJV says is true, the whole thing.the plan of salvation was started in the old testiment then Jesus came and completed it, that's the reason he said "it is finished" when he was on the cross. obviously false, because?God doesn't have that much power? biology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pamela Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Goku, It is only true because you believe it to be- you cannot prove or disprove its validityWhat exactly do you mean by "biology?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted January 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Goku, you are contradicting yourself here-first you deem them crazy and throw them out-then you say you have a get together ,to read, and seek guidanceShould you be passing such a judgement given your choice of religion?I have found that many church goers are odd, I refrain from using the word queer-it has other demeaning connotations well it is possible for me to do that, first i was refurring to the time i seen the crazy person thrown out, or escorted out.the second would be an instance where a deacon, or leader as you say, says something. in that case we pray, discuss, discide. odd? i mean homosexual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 everything the KJV says is true, the whole thing.the plan of salvation was started in the old testiment then Jesus came and completed it, that's the reason he said "it is finished" when he was on the cross. obviously false, because?God doesn't have that much power? biology? Let me make it clear. You are no different here at the forum than the money changers in the temple. Keep it up and we'll follow Jesus' example and throw you out. :Bump2: Now inspite of your pride in your ignorance, you may want to study something of the origin of that 'right' Bible. >> http://hypography.com/forums/theology-forum/8683-who-re-wrote-the-bible.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted January 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Goku, It is only true because you believe it to be- you cannot prove or disprove its validityWhat exactly do you mean by "biology?" science can't recreate the flood, but you can look at the evidence of said flood, scientifically. is it biologically impossible to have a flood? you do realize that the flood was not natural? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pamela Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 I knew what you meant......I was hoping that you would see your error, without having to mention that what you said was degrading to homosexuals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 science can't recreate the flood, but you can look at the evidence of said flood, scientifically. No science cannot recreate the flood, there is no source for that much water on the Earth. On the other hand yes we can look for evidence of that flood and there is none. is it biologically impossible to have a flood? Yes it is biologically impossible for there to have been a world wide flood, such a flood would have wiped out all freshwater fishes and any other life forms that depend on water of a certain salinity like corals and marine invertebrates.On top of that there is no genetic evidence that all animal populations on the planet were bottle necked into just two individuals at any time.Even more obviously there is no room on the Ark for two of every animal in the world, a nuclear powered super Carrier would not be big enough much less a boat as small as the Ark. you do realize that the flood was not natural? Yes I do realize the flood was supposed to be a supernatural occurrence, lots of mythological things are thought of in that manner. If anything being a mythological occurrence doesn't exactly make it more likely to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Parental indoctrination.Experience. Role models.The observation of consequences.The wisdom of the elders.This is really interesting, Pyro. It could be readily argued that there is no such thing (by definition) as "right" or "wrong" in the absence of an objective external reference (e.g., God). The items you list may indeed inform your decisionmaking, but what makes them "right"? Do you have a definition for something that is "right"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 I gave valid examples of sources of moral training.Valid examples of training. We are still trying to define what "moral" training is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REASON Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 self correcting? well we try to do as Jesus taught, the best we can.if somebody comes in the church talking crazy, we throw them out. i've seen it done before.does that answer your question? :Bump2: Yeah, Jesus was known for throwing people out that had the nerve to question him. It doesn't appear that you guys are working very hard to be like Jesus and follow his teachings, it appears you guys are attempting to mold Jesus and the Bible to justify your own bias and intolerance. It's a common tale. This statement of yours, goku, actually does answer one of Moon's questions as I see it. In essence, you are saying that anyone who steps out of line is removed from the group and labeled "crazy." And of course, no one wants to be embarrassed like that in front of the congregation, so they remain quiet and conformative. You give complete deference to the Bible and it's interpreter in the form of your pastor. No questioning allowed or you face physical removal. This is a form of information control and can become of form of mind control. The more the congregation resembles a flock of sheep, the more apparent it is that the controls are working. It is here that you have come to raise your questions and have faced suspension as well. But that isn't because you are judged as "crazy," it is because you have apparently broken site rules. As long as you are civil and follow the rules, you are welcome in this community no matter what you believe. That's the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Now inspite of your pride in your ignorance, you may want to study something of the origin of that 'right' Bible.T- I can offer with some confidence that Goku, as sincere as he seems (he?), is not the individual to defend the integrity of the Bible in this forum. Moonman- I read your posts here, and you seem a little hostile. I don't particularly mind that, I am just sort of wondering if that is true. If so, why? Goku is clearly a "young" thinker in terms of attempting to engage someone from your perspective. What is energizing you here? Bio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 T- I can offer with some confidence that Goku, as sincere as he seems (he?), is not the individual to defend the integrity of the Bible in this forum. If you're stepping up to the plate, Biochemist, I'd be happy to square off. ~modest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Yeah, Jesus was known for throwing people out that had the nerve to question him. Hmmm. Doesn't seem to be a typical perspective on Jesus. As I recall, Jesus was only hostile to the portion of church leaders who he felt misled folks. Anyone else (including religious sorts- e.g., Nicodemus) he invited questions from. And he engaged each individual differently. What example are you thinking about here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REASON Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Hmmm. Doesn't seem to be a typical perspective on Jesus. As I recall, Jesus was only hostile to the portion of church leaders who he felt misled folks. Anyone else (including religious sorts- e.g., Nicodemus) he invited questions from. And he engaged each individual differently. What example are you thinking about here? Sorry. I was being sarcastic. I should have used a smiley or something to avoid confusion. Most people that are familiar with my posts here were probably able to detect it. Thanks for assisting with my round-about point though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 If you're stepping up to the plate, Biochemist, I'd be happy to square off.Maybe. But my experience here in the past is not all that positive. Rational arguments around Biblical topics here get pretty negative pretty quickly. If you are serious about this, let me suggest that we pick one of three thread directions: 1) Is Christianity different, and if so why? (this would follow a narrow portion of the Goku path) 2) Is there such a thing a "right" and "wrong"? This would probably lead back into the prior discussion about morals. This usually is inseparable from a discussion of determinism and free will 3) Are God and science at odds? Each of these topics has at least two valid positions. And I do mean valid. I would NOT directly engage in any defense of the Bible per se, unless we had vented at least 2 of the above first. Let me know if these options make sense to you. Or just pick one. Bio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Sorry. I was being sarcastic. Apology fully accepted. Sorry I didn't pick up the jest. Bio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 T- I can offer with some confidence that Goku, as sincere as he seems (he?), is not the individual to defend the integrity of the Bible in this forum. Moonman- I read your posts here, and you seem a little hostile. I don't particularly mind that, I am just sort of wondering if that is true. If so, why? Goku is clearly a "young" thinker in terms of attempting to engage someone from your perspective. What is energizing you here? Bio I am trying to hide my hostility toward those would try and dictate reality to others or say that reality is circumscribed by belief. As a person I'm quite goku is a nice guy but he is not here to learn he is here to stir controversy. He denigrates people like farmers by alluding to them and himself as somehow unable to learn not to mention anyone who doesn't believe the way he does. He seems to have disdain for anyone outside his world view. He asks questions not caring for the answer, only for the opportunity to sow discord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts