 |
|
|
|
 "The idea of deep time ... explains so much of the world around us," Bill Nye said in the viral video.
August 31st, 2012
04:34 PM ET
Creationists hit back at Bill Nye with their own videoBy Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor (CNN) - Bill Nye's viral YouTube video pleading with parents not to teach their children to deny evolution has spawned an online life of its own, with prominent creationists hitting back against the popular TV host. "Time is Nye for a Rebuttal," Ken Ham the CEO of Answers in Genesis writes on his website. Answers in Genesis is the Christian ministry behind the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. Nye's criticism of creationism went viral earlier this week, after being posted last Thursday. "I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, that's completely inconsistent with the world we observe, that's fine. But don't make your kids do it," Nye says in his Big Think video, which has been viewed nearly 3 million times.
Ham writes that Nye is joining in with other evolutionists who say teaching children to deny evolution is a form of "child abuse." That idea comes in part from the atheist scientist Richard Dawkins, who in his book "The God Delusion" argues against exposing children to religion before they are old enough to fully understand it. CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories "At AiG and the Creation Museum, we teach children and adults the truth concerning who they are in the Creator’s eyes — and where they came from," Ham writes. "We tell people that they do have purpose and meaning in life and that they were created for a purpose. "No, we are not just evolved animals as Nye believes; we are all made in the image of God." Ham is the public face of a group that academics call Young Earth Creationists, though they prefer to be called Biblical Creationists. They believe in a literal interpretation of the creation account in the book of Genesis found in the Bible. The Creation Museum also produced its own rebuttal video on YouTube that features two of their staff scientists, both Ph.Ds, David Menton and Georgia Purdom. "[Nye] might be interested to know I also teach my young daughter about evolution and I know many Christian parents who do the same," Purdom says in the video. "Children should be exposed to both ideas concerning our past." For the past 30 years, one popular method for Creationists to advance their cause has been to make an equal-time argument,with Creationism taught alongside evolution. In the late 1980s, some state legislatures passed bills that promoted the idea of a balanced treatment of both ideas in the classroom. In 1987, the issue made it all the way to the Supreme Court, where a Louisiana "equal-time law" was struck down. The court ruled that teaching creationism in public school class rooms was a violation of the Establishment Cause in the Constitution, which is commonly referred to as the separation of church and state. A key point between most scientists and many creationists is the timing for the origin of the world. Your Take: 5 reactions to Bill Nye's creationism critique Nye's argument falls in line with the vast majority of scientists, who date the age of the earth as 4.5 billion years old and the universe as 14.5 billion years old. "The idea of deep time of billions of years explains so much of the world around us. If you try to ignore that, your worldview becomes crazy, untenable, itself inconsistent," Nye says in his viral video. Young Earth Creationists say the weeklong account of God creating the earth and everything in it represents six 24-hour periods (plus one day of rest) and date the age of the earth between 6,000 and 10,000 years. "Yes we see fossils and distant stars, but the history on how they got there really depends on our worldview," Purdom says in the museum's rebuttal. "Do we start with man's ideas, who wasn't here during man's supposed billions of years of earth history or do we start with the Bible, the written revelation of the eyewitness account of the eternal God who created it all?" Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter Polling from Gallup has shown for the past 30 years that between 40-46% of the survey respondents believe in Creationism, that God created humans and the world in the past 10,000 years. The most recent poll showed belief in atheistic evolution was on the rise at 16%, nearly double what it had been in previous years. The poll also found 32% of respondents believe in evolution guided by God. |
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Ethel, other parts of the world? You tryin' to rebuild the Tower of Babel? We have the Monroe Doctrine but that's not gud enuf for progressives.
Sadly, the United States is in serious decline. A large contributing factor is the anti-education, pro-religion segment of the population. The GOP nominee wears magic underpants, believes in baptizing dead people, and follows the writings of a convicted fraudster. AND HE MIGHT WIN!!!!!
It is worse then that Ethel.
We have a growing and very powerfull group of people who want to turn this country into the christian version of Saudi Arabia.
They are well financed, well organized, and are using that pool of uneducated and religious zealots like our friend Mud here to advance their agenda.
I am never more frieghtened then when I hear someone around me is deeply religious.
It is kinda like hearing someone yell "allah Akbar" in a crowded market.
nikthenat sayz, '....I am never more frieghtened then when I hear someone around me is deeply religious.....' Admitting you're a bigot are ye? Now that you have come to the awareness that you are a wretched sinner I offer this:'Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.'
Hey, Muddy – how is that being bigoted? I think it's an entirely natural and healthy form of self-defense, to be more vigilant when around those suffering from delusions. If the authorities had been a bit more vigilant 9/11 may not have succeeded.
Can you believe CNN doesn't like the KJV? What bigotry! Will one of you computer savvy dudes please quote Revelation 21:8 for my pal nit the wit?
Ethel, interesting you brought up delusions. Here's the skinny: 'Isa 66:4 I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose [that] in which I delighted not.'
Revelation 21:8
King James Version (KJV)
8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and who.remongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Of course, I do not give any credit to anything taken from The Bable!
Hey, Mud – do you even begin to grasp the stupidity of what you are doing – quoting the bible to atheists? You really, really really, really, really, really, really don't get it, do you? It's a book. That's all it is. That's all it will ever be. Not divinely inspired. Not written by god. Not the word of god. A book. Why not try something more effective – try quoting Shakespeare.
So Ethel, that was then and this is now, '2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.' This is for the Christian era. Hey it's not like God hasn't done it before and He's telling you His moves!
Thanks OG for the help in my time of trial.
Here's the skinny Ethel, 'Isa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it.'
Have you ever considered changing your screen name to Have Mud for Brains? Because your thinking processes seem a tad messed up.
Let me ask you this: why THIS god? Why not believe in other gods? There are enough of them. If you had been born in a non-Christian country you probably would believe in another god. So why this god?
I can't even bear to wade through this moron's posts!
Well Ethel, you probably read more Scriptures in two days here than you would in a gumit bowed down church in a year of Sundays.
Ethel, what's your take on arranged marriages? Gandhi was into a jr high girl. It seems to be a trend for lady HS teachers to favor the same age group. I think you need to keep these educratists on a short leash.
Is that an answer to the question about other gods? Avoidance. Denial. Not good signs that you have a true grasp of what's going on.
Athena and the Educratists won't tell you the truth about the pledge of allegiance. I heard a recording of JOHN WAYNE reciting it and almost barfed.
Pledge allegiance to someone you love, not a garishly colored sheet.
It is amazing to see how people love to cling to the belief of an incompetent god! A competent god would have created a perfect world, in a single instant, and that world would go on, on its own, form that moment on forever. No way. God created things in six days, with bits and pieces jerry rigged together, like a rib here, mud there... And now, he has to keep tinkering with it all the time, to keep it from collapsing completely! Let's hope he does it right next time.
Pierre, you're just impatient. 'Isa 66:22 ¶ For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.'....'2Pe 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.'....'Rev 21:1 ¶ And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.'
There's this from the Gospel of John. Is Jesus claiming to be God in this passage? Note: the author(s?) of the Gospel of John make the claim that Jesus said this at all.
30"I and the Father are one.”
31 Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
33 “We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? 37 Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. 38 But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
Chad: "=>yes"
We can carry on from here if you like, Chad. I don't see an explicit statement like "I am the Father" or "I am the Lord your God". "I and the Father are One" has possibilities. What do you make of that, Chad?
what were they stoning him for?
Why were they about to stone him? Blasphemy. They claimed that he claimed to be God. Let's apply ourselves to the whole passage. In Jesus' reply he called himself God's Son: "Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?"
Actually, they did accuse him of blasphemy. His defence? "All I did was say to my wife, "That piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah!" "
If you acknowledge that Jesus called Himself the Son of God, I'm confused on what point you are making then?
No point to make, Chad. Just curious. The mob thought Jesus claimed to be God. Jesus seemed to want to clarify things by reminding them that he said "I am God's Son". Why would Jesus make that distinction?
"I and the Father are one.”
‘I am God’s Son’
are both statements by Jesus affirming His divinity, not sure where you are getting hung up...
"I and the Father are one" should be looked at closely. Here are two verses where Jesus seems to be describing the same kind of relationship:
John 10:30
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2010:30&version=SBLGNT
John 17:22
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2017:22&version=SBLGNT
The Greek is pretty clear.
yah
you read Greek? lol
ok, so I get it now.. I was wondering before what your deal was..
you just get jollies out of attempting to send folks on wild goose chases.. "har har.. look at the stupid Christian"..
sorry to spoil your fun.. not interested.
That reaction is strange enough to make think you might be someone trolling as Chad.
I don't read Greek well, but I use an Interlinear English-Greek New Testament to help me understand things like this. I'm not out to make you look like a "stupid Christian", just trying to discuss something that I thought you might know about, or at least have an informed opinion about.
I'm sure 🙂
well, if you can manage to crystallize your thoughts into a specific point, that would be interesting..
Also, about wild goose chases, I've never pointed out a reference to you that wasn't to-the-point, appropriate to the topic you were on and, not least, available on the internet.
and, your specific point in this particular thread
is
what?
A specific question: Did Jesus make a clear claim of being God? This actually came up because of your earlier quote from C.S. Lewis.
"I and the Father are one.”
‘I am God’s Son’
are both statements by Jesus affirming His divinity, not sure where you are getting hung up...
By affirming that He was Gods Son, He was affirming His equality with God, His "oneness" with God.
Jesus is the Son, God is the father, they are two separate and distinct "persons".
"1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning
Christianity 101:
Jesus claimed to be the unique Son of God. As a result, the Jewish leaders tried to kill Him because in "calling God his own Father, [Jesus was] making himself equal with God" (John 5:18 NIV). In John 8:58 Jesus went so far as to use the very words by which God revealed Himself to Moses from the burning bush (Exodus 3:14). To the Jews this was the epitome of blasphemy, for they knew that in doing so Jesus was clearly claiming to be God. On yet another occasion, Jesus explicitly told the Jews: "'I and the Father are one.' Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, 'I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?' 'We are not stoning you for any of these,' replied the Jews, 'but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God'" (John 10:30-33).
Furthermore, Jesus made an unmistakable claim to deity before the Chief Priests and the whole Sanhedrin. Caiaphas the High Priest asked him: "'Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?' 'I am,' said Jesus. 'And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven'" (Mark 14:61-62 NIV). A biblically illiterate person might well have missed the import of Jesus' words. Caiaphas and the Council, however, did not. They knew that in saying he was "the Son of Man" who would come "on the clouds of heaven" he was making an overt reference to the Son of Man in Daniel's prophecy (Daniel 7:13-14). In doing so, He was not only claiming to be the preexistent Sovereign of the Universe but also prophesying that He would vindicate His claim by judging the very court that was now condemning Him. Moreover, by combining Daniel's prophecy with David's proclamation in Psalm 110, Jesus was claiming that He would sit upon the throne of Israel's God and share God's very glory. To students of the Old Testament this was the height of "blasphemy," thus "they all condemned him as worthy of death" (Mark 14:64-65).
Finally, Jesus claimed to possess the very attributes of God. For example, He claimed omniscience by telling Peter, "This very night, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times" (Matthew 26:34); declared omnipotence by not only resurrecting Lazarus (John 11:43) but by raising Himself from the dead (see John 2:19); and professed omnipresence by promising He would be with His disciples "to the very end of the age" (Matthew 28:20). Not only so, but Jesus said to the paralytic in Luke 5:20, "Friend, your sins are forgiven". In doing so, He claimed a prerogative reserved for God alone. In addition, when Thomas worshiped Jesus saying "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28), Jesus responded with commendation rather than condemnation.
I agree that John 1:1 and John 1:4 taken together do say this: Jesus was the incarnation of the Word. The Word was in the beginning (not from the beginning) with God and was God. The author of the Gospel of John is claiming that Jesus was God in the beginning and became incarnate. He leaves out something important. Was the incarnation of the Word (Jesus) still God?
At any rate, let's not get diverted from things Jesus is said to have said about himself and whether Jesus made a claim of being God. He claimed to be the Son of God. Actually we add the definite article – one of the problems with using English. So Jesus admitted to saying that he was (not necessarily the unique) son of God in John I0:36. He claimed to be something other than God.
Sorry, that's John 1:1 and John 1:14
He claimed to be the Son of God.
Jesus and God are two distinct "persons"
I think the common statement is "distinct in person but one in essence". Do you agree?
Distinct persons, but also one in ways we cant understand..
I brought up the Greek text of the verses in John because John 17:22 clearly has it that Jesus wanted believers to be one – to have the same relationship with each other that Jesus claimed to have with God the Father. It's not clear to me what it means to be "one" in the sense that he meant. Your thoughts on this, Chad?
Dont know..
There are aspects of believers being "one", (sharing the Holy Spirit that approximate the unique relationship that Jesus has with the God of Abraham), but there are also aspects that I can't imagine believers could participate in.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if these so-called atheists are really socialists in drag.........'Act 19:28 And when they heard [these sayings], they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great [is] Diana of the Ephesians.'
I'm sure it wouldn't surprise you, since you've already made up your mind about atheists, you silly fraud.
ooohhhh!!!! calling someone a "socialist'!!!! OOOHHHHH, scary – ya twit! You're American, right? I say that because in other parts of the world, people actually know what the word means! So enjoy your socialist army, your socialist highways, your socialist schools, your socialist post office, etc, etc, etc. Moron.
Ethel, I'd just as soon pass on that side of wrath. Maybe someone else is hungry?
Mud Puddle mistakes "socialism" for "socialized". They are not the same.
What on earth has socialism got to do with atheism?
I bet you don't even know what the word socialist means.
You just keep hearing it on Faux news and think it means something bad.
Go back to your fairy tale and your guns and your racist backward friends.
Hey, you sure you have enough food and water in the bunker?
I'm economically conservative and an atheist. So suck it.
You are an endangered species Rational Libtarn.
With the current tragectory of the republican party, Reagan would be drummed out as being a liberal.
I feel sorry for people like you, and David Frumm and David Brooks, who are true conservatives who believe in an actual functioning smaller government and sound fiscal policy but leaving out the social issues (think god).
Somehow the AM radio tin foil hat crowd has taken over and the face of the party is now people like Jan Brewer.
I feel sorry for all of us really.
I am NOT like Frum and Brooks. They are neocons and socially backward. I see my views as been similar to Ron Paul.
Being.
I don't see Frumm or Brooks are anywhere near being a neo con. I remember Brooks critizing Wolfewitz, a true neocon, on the News Hour.
I have read many opeds by Frumm and he is very nuanced and seems to be someone who has his facts down and someone from the gop that I could have an actual discussion with.
Not that I agree with his views, but at least he would have actual facts to back us his position.
If you think they are neocons, then you might be in the wrong party.
I'm not in a party.
@ niknak: Nuanced? Has his facts down? You could have a conversation with him??? This Frumm fellow sounds almost – dare I say it – Canadian!
P. T. Barnum's last words:“How were the circus receipts in Madison Square Gardens?” What a pol of the socialist persuasion! You know, the socialists of the WCTU types that pass themselves off as Christians.
The fact that there are fake gods doesnt mean that God of Abraham is fake any more than the fact that there are fake Elvis's means there was no real Elvis.
How do YOU know they're fake?
Sing it, kids: 'Cause the Bible tells me so."
They are hinduism, fabrication of pot head hindu santan's, filthy goons, trying to be god's of human.
You know, you make just as much sense as Chard does.
God of Ibrahim is truth absolute having control over ever thing in existence proven by Quntum physics.
@ Chad: Is Santa fake? Is the Easter Bunny fake? Is your implausible, impossible, illusory god of the bible fake? Yes, yes, and yes. Chad – a serious question: WHY do you believe that your god exists?
Quntum physics? Do they offer courses in that in Delhi?
The search for evidence of God is like a search for a black cat in a large cluttered coal-dark room when there's no cat.
Borrowed from Stuart Firestein. Hope he doesn't mind.
hindu's of hindered ignorant land india know quantum physics, but they do not comprehend it in their hinduism, mental dyslexia.
Hey, 2357: Do you believe in the god Zeus? or Odin? Or Ra? All of these gods have been described in books. All of these gods have been worshipped as the one true god. Do you believe in them? If you don't then congratulations – you're an atheist!
No, if some one does not believe in hindu fabricated god's by hinduism ignorance, it does not make him a atheist self centered but a follower of truth absolute. to find truth about hinduism, denial of truth absolute visit http://www.limitisthetruth.com/.
What the frig did you just say???????
All those hindu fabricated god's are hinduism, absurdity of pot head hindu santan's ignorant goons, having nothing to do with truth absolute, hindu's. ignorant s have no knowledge of. Vist http://www.limitisthetruth.com/ to find out.
Ethel,
Yes i believe there are many gods in every culture. None of them are worthy of worship however, as they are demons posting as God. Their purpose is to weed out the impure in heart from seeking YHWH
funny you should say that i believe in all gods and YHWH is is the evil one
Yahweh is one evil mother f.ucker.
The full ti.tle of Zeus is Zeus Pater, meaning "Heavenly One, Father," or simply "Heavenly Father." I suppose people still worship him under various names.
@2357: And you know that your god isn't simply posing as a demon is . . . . ? Here's a little fact: your god is just the same as all of the other gods – simply a creation from the minds of people. You realize that your arguments about YOUR god being the one TRUE god are EXACTLY the same as the arguments made by millions of people before you. Are you so arrogant to claim that you, and you alone, out of all of the billions of people who have ever lived, KNOW the real answer? Stop for a second and think about how delusional that is!
There is realm of spirits at the threshold of material reality. It is littered with demons with strong influence. Their goal is to slander God to you and slander you to God. Mockery is their sport, your soul's destruction is their ecstasy. If you deny their evil and buy into their lies, you leave you heart wide open to their manipulation. Try inviting them in, actively, if you feel so bold about yourself.
@2357: you sound insane.
Ethel,
When your demon gods have overtaken you and are dragging you under, call out to Yeshua the soon of YHWH the God of Abraham. May he reveal his meek self to you in the day of your distress.
2357: do you have children? if so, do you fill their little minds with such horror? There is no boogyman. There are no demons. Who needs demons when humans are so capable of such death and destruction? Dresden. Auschwitz. Hiroshima. This were the acts of people, not demons.
@2357. Please explain why you believe in your god but reject all the others. The arguments you make apply to all gods yet you only choose to make favorable comments about yours and unfavorable comments about the others. The only difference between you and an atheist is that the ateist believes in one less god than you.
@2357
You are seriously whacked, or a real comedic genious.
I am going with the former.
Its cool you want to believe in your magic man. Get together with your magic man fan club and recite your magic spells from your magic book. Its a free country, (well, not really, but I am using the expression here), waste all the time you want.
But don't push it on the rest of us who choose not to believe in fairy tales.
It is cute when a young child believes in santa claus, but creepy when an adult goes.....
I believe the Hebrew prophets and the Jewish apostles, because I find their eyewitness testimonies to be convincing and without self-exalting motives to gain something from my loss. I don't trust people, not even myself. I cannot commend in the same confidence most priests, pastors, politicians or professors.
@2357: which "eyewitness accounts"? And what steps did you take to convince yourself of their veracity? remember – we're talking about events that supposedly occurred over 2000 years ago – one would assume that you really, really did your homework
You know, the gospels where ragtag apostles were always being chided by the Rabbi Yeshua for being dull and faithless. And major and minor prophets who were always persecuted by kings and mobs for relaying the words from YHWH. For ancient records purportedly "fabricated by masonic templars to dominate the world", these records have a marvelous self-authenticating meekness that is missing in other sacerdotal creeds. Why should king David allow his shameful scandals pass down in scrolls? Why should the patriarchs, or cephas, submit to the recounting of their cowardice and incompetence? To delude the masses into blind adoration of their grandeur? I know what dogmatic decree sounds like, just read papal bulls and denominational creeds. The Hebrew narratives concerning their primary witnesses of Yaweh God are not even in the same category.
@2357 – meekness? That's it? Wow! Sold. You do understand that some of the least reliable evidence is eye-witness testimony? People are terrible at accurately conveying what they actually observed, as opposed to what they think they observed. So – again – which specific eye-witness accounts?
Ethel,
" in the year king Uzziah died, I saw the Lord, high and exalted, seated on his throne, and the train of his robe filled the temple. Above him stood the seraphim and each had six wings, with two they covered their eyes with two they covered their feet and with two they flew, calling out saying "holy, holy, holy is the Lord Elohim Almighty! The whole earth is Filled with His glory!"
Isaiah, prophet of Israel, eyewitness of the temple of God in heaven, hearing the witness of the strongest captains among angels. Read the rest, it is simply astonishing, and meek.
You see, every temple, church, cathedral, synagogue on earth is just a dirt pile compared to the temple of Elohim, YHWH. Teachers of empty sacramental creeds without revelation are just leaves rustling in the wind.
2357 – holy, holy, holy alright! Holy Sh!t! That is the supposed eye-witness account you take as verbatim? In a book, someone says they saw god. Therefore, it's true?
Let me ask you this: do you believe in alien life? There are many books in existence today, written by people who are still alive, and who you could cross-examine, and subject to lie detector tests, who claim to have been abducted by aliens. These are contemporary, current accounts of these abductions – and would be far, far more reliable than an unsubstantiated story from a 2000 year old book. So do you believe in aliens?
I have never seen an alien, or anything like it. I grew up thinking they were hoaxes, but now I'm not sure, having heard some of the accounts. Also the OT is full of paranormal phenomena and exotic humanoids. Nephilim come to mind, and the giants of caanan. Goliath and his brothers, etc. If they profess love for Christ they're probably angels. If they are repulsed by Christ they're possesed by demons. The same rule applies to all other creatures.
I really cannot respect and admire Bill Nye at a greater level than I do right now. I'm sure he didn't think his statement would get this much attention, and I'm sure he wishes that the country were at a different philosophical "place" so that it wouldn't have caused this sort of controversy, but it's done. Now, the line has been drawn. You live your life based on thousand-year-old myths and fairy tales or rational, tangible data. Join the 21st century, folks. It's the one you're living in, so it only makes sense.
Honey badger,
Sin is any thought word our deed that diminishes the fullness God's glorious character. We all sin, all the time. We are immersed in sin like fish in water.
@2357; could you explain how something a mere human being thinks "diminishes the fullness God's glorious character". So if enough people think bad things God's character will be diminished to nothing? Doesn't sound like a very omnipotent being. "I think; therefore you're not".
It all comes down to how you define your world in your own mind. If you see everything as sin, then you can think of no other alternative than some all-encompassing, light/life type character completely "holy" and separate from you "saving" you and others who will see things in the same terms you do. It's called: I want my own personal brand of crazy to be adopted by everybody, everywhere. And just look what happens when you can get everybody around you to go along with your craziness.......you get michael jackson and bishop eddie long and jim jones and david koresh and etc and etc and etc....
When you esteem God as unimportant or evil, you diminish his character in the realm allotted to your soul. That realm becomes diminished in God's view to a realm of lies.
so you agree that the bible and gods are lies
Without the Bible we would not know the supremacy of God's goodness. He is the origin of all truth in the world. He authored like and knowledge, and we all pilfer from him like parasitic microbes. Some of us thank him, the rest are to proud, even with his provision in our bellies.
2357, you lie. Why do you lie? Or do you have some evidence to back up your statements?
The same sovereign God created death, so that none of us would ever escape his holy scrutiny.
"in the day that you eat of the fruit, you will surely die"
Moses transcribed that terrifying mandate. Moses was a prophet of YHWH. He beheld God's glory and still lived. What do you behold?
@2357; I behold that you are nuttier than an entire warehouse of Planter's. I behold that you are wackier than a Whack-A-Mole convention. I behold that you have been brain washed to a staggering degree, and unfortunately you are wasting your life living in a toxic soup of religious delusion. Which is actually very sad, because once you're dead, that's it – finito. No second chances.
What's kind of strange it's that when naturalists and materialists say "there is nothing after death" they are actually not completely off. Yeshua said that the flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God, meaning no thing can enter into the spirit realm. Nothingness is therefore the secret realm where God reigns supreme with his spirit creatures. The precise thing top say might be not "God does not exist" but rather "God exists in nothingness" or "God is no thing"
@2357: from your post: "Yeshua said that the flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God" – Oh you were there, and heard this person – Jesus, I assume – say what you said he said. Otherwise, it's hearsay. You then attributed a meaning to what this dude supposedly said: "meaning no thing can enter into the spirit realm." So, now you – 2357, a person, a simple human – YOU are the spokesman for god? You get to explain what god said? Wow – doesn't that smack of supreme arrogance? You – 2357 – you of all the people in the world – are god's mouthpiece. And with no evidence whatsoever to back up your claim. Delusional. Simply delusional.
Yeshua said "that which is flesh is flesh, and that which is spirit is spirit. The words that I say to you, they are spirit, and they are life. The flesh profits nothing"
Just conveying his statements, with minimal interpretation i hope.
2357 – same question: you say those are his "Statements". How do you KNOW that he made those statements? Were you there? (Let me answer that for you: No, Ethel – I wasn't there – I'm simply relying on hearsay, 2000 year old hearsay, in fact, interpreted and translated again and again and again over the ages). Second point; you're interpreting the supposed words of god. Even minimally. Who are YOU to do that? You know what was in the mind of god? That's like a virus saying that it knows what Einstein really meant by E=mc2. Actually, that analogy isn't good enough – a virus and Einstein are far closer together than a human and a supposed god. Arrogance.
Ethel,
when did you meet Dr Einstein? Mr Darwin? How can we know who actually wrote the Declaration? Were you there when Charlemagne drafted the magna carta? Did Homer employ a Chinese grad student? How do we know the Sumerian clay tablets were not the footprints of a chicken? Have you touched every transitional fossil and verified the saying method with your own equipment and lab? My point is, almost all of our understanding is hopelessly mediated from the source. We know actually very little from direct experience, yes, even in science. As a rule the more precious the knowledge, the more tolls they charge along the way. That is why you reject the easy and freely available truth. Too obvious, not esoteric enough. Any fool can then be enlightened. But why should the truth be available only to the educated elite? Why is mere literacy insufficient for higher enlightenment? At some point, freely available statements must be weighed purely on their own merit and not on prejudice over format, author or camp. I stopped favoring sages over fools, elites over the common. Only then was I able to grope at the trail of patterns and proceed out of the darkness of my heart.
2357 – you religious types certainly don't like answering simple questions, do you? You said made a claim that some god-dude of over 2000 years ago made a specific statement, which you then went on to interpret. What is your specific – not general – basis for claiming that you know that the god-dude made that specific statement? Who was there? Where was it made? When was it made? Under what circu-mstances? What are the bona fides of the purported witnesses? How reliable were they? Who credible were they? What contemporaneous docu-mentary evidence of their observations is available? You get my drift.
Admit it – it all comes down to, It says it in the bible, therefore it's true.
It's a 2000 year old collection of fairy tales, fables, and stories written by men to control people. It was written when people knew very, very little about the world. Why would your god be satisfied with such a crappy guidebook? It sucks! If it's the word of your god, your god sounds strikingly like an illiterate bronze-age goat herder. Go god – woo woo!
Ethel,
Time will attest, that in a hundred years the ancient scrolls will remain at least as important as yesterday's research papers.
Behold Funding, the Baal of this age.
God chose suffering as means of communicating with us humans. When he made us in his image he built in empathy as a powerful safety mechanism that would trigger imitation of his divine attributes when confronted with great trauma and injustice. Without empathy we become untethered from reality and meaning, we become worse than beasts. We are meant to exercise this empathy upon the slaughtered child of God and his mourning father. This is the primary will of God for the universe.
Animals can exhibit empathy toward other animals – does that mean that god made them in his image? You're saying that your god is a jacka-ss?
All creatures will exhibit character attributes of their maker to the extent that he allows. many animals behave with more divine nobility than certain people, yes. Others simply carry on with utter indifference.
That's the most ridiculous thing I've read in my whole life. But it's definitely good for a laugh. Keep up the entertaining posts, 2357.
Creature implies creator. What you make tells the world about your character. You make things, don't you? Like statements?
creature does not imply creator.
Prime mover. Nothing comes into being without a maker of being. Action implies actor. It should be obvious to a neutral mind.
@ 2357: Then what made god?
By his own definition God is the being who simply is, without a father or maker. He is the origin of all existence. Yet he himself is no thing. He is the origin and source of personhood.
@2357 – you just contradicted yourself. You said, "Nothing comes into being without a maker of being." Ergo, god must have a maker of god. What is the maker of god? And what is the maker of the maker of god? And so on ad infinitum. Have you ever noticed that believers go through tremendous contortions of language and logic trying to justify and explain their position?
Ethel,
I say again, God is NOT a thing. He is being. He predates time and space, matter and energy. This is why it is impossible to "prove his existence", because existence is a category for things. You are in the habit of dismissing immaterial realities as irrelevant and worthless. It's the zeitgeist I understand, but you yourself at the core are Being, not matter. Your person is spirit. Molecules don't feel humiliation. Matter is indifferent to morality.
2357: I – my being, my consciousness – whatever you want to call it – arises from the bio-electro-chemical operation of my brain. Not from some farcical galactic being. I understand that is what you believe, and you believe it based on faith, as opposed to evidence, but my brain will not allow me to take such an easy way out to the most important question of life. Why would anyone be satisfied by such an easy facile answer?
@Ethel the Aardvark
Many organisms have some form of neural network and synaptic response to stimuli. But it's a quantum leap from sensory response to thoughts like the ones you've been having all night. A garage door can have sensory responses. Are you claiming that all of your thoughts and emotions are a mere mechanism that is essentially equivalent to a garage door or a thermostat?
Hey, check out the dime store toupee on that dude!
That's hilarious!
As equally hilarious as all (many, most, etc,) christs-on-a-cross appearing to be blue eyed blonde Europeans...
Um, no, not really.
Jesus looks good in those pictures.
This guy?
Not so much.
I think it's due to Bill's cheap rug, the sunken eye sockets, and the jug-handle ears.
Tommy,
Sunken eyes? Gaunt? Large ears?
Have you taken a gander at any pictures of Abe Lincoln lately?
Tommy. I think the point is – Jesus if he existed was not European so he would look like a native of the Middle East
From another story ...
"Rev. Moon died from overwork, from frequent trips aboard, including to the U.S., and from MORNING PRAYERS which caused respiratory disease," Ahn Ho-yeol, a church spokesman said.
Haha .. I guess prayer DOES change things! That one's for you Justsayin', Heaven Sent & Atheism is healthy...
Prayer changeth things
"Rev. Moon died from .. morning prayers which caused respiratory disease," Ahn Ho-yeol, a church spokesman said.
I guess it does change things .. PROVEN LOL
I'm sorry "Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things", but you assertions regarding atheism and prayer are unfounded. I see that you repeat these unfounded statements with high frequency. Perhaps the following book might help you overcome this problem:
I'm Told I Have Dementia: What You Can Do... Who You Can Turn to...
by the Alzheimer's Disease Society
or how about the book "Everyone Poops".
Prayer changes things? Well, sure it does – the 9/11 hijackers were praying to their god for a successful mission, and – well, doggies! – their god came through for them in spades, didn't he? Talk about giving the infidel a major butt-kicking! Prayer changed the Manhattan skyline, that's for sure.
@horses...
Moon did not pray to God Moon prayed to a demon , Moon never knew God.
@lilith
filth is the best you can do and will be the most you can hope for.
@efhel...
the 9/11 hijackers did not pray to God, they did not know God . Even if they were the most devout Muslims they would not be praying to God. allah is an idol
"truth" be told – have you lost faith in redemption ?
Not at all. For all mentioned the sinners prayer is the first and only prayer God would have heard from them. Since none were born again all perished outside the grace of God. Redemption requires an action on the part of the redeemed.
So funny to watch TuBeTop pretend to know the answers to these questions.
Still sitting in your puddle sucking your thumb and hoping you'll be noticed?
@ "truth" – you told Lilith that filth was the best she could hope for. Does that not clash with hope for redemption ?
Reprobate may be beyond redemption
TuBeTop may be beyond laughable.
Of course, every time the moron types a post, it removes more doubt about its stupidity.
You should change yourself you are starting to stink.
And the Biblical passages which indicate the universality of redemption can be ignored then ?
@midwest rail
the phrase was "will be the best..." not "was the best..." the word will indicates a work in progress not an existent state, the filth of a lilith may indicate reprobate.
" Filth will be the most you can hope for " seems pretty straightforward to me. Let the tap dancing begin.
As with any covenant there are things required of both parties. God has done His part, redemption is available but redemption is not automatic. Salvation is worked out with fear and trembling.
I cannot be responsible for your lack of understanding language.
According to the Biblical account of the crucifixion, was not redemption available to those crucified with Jesus, right up to the moment of their death ? That would seem to be in conflict with your assertion that filth will be the best she can hope for.
"I cannot be responsible for your lack of understanding language."
It might help if you actually knew anything about said language. From your posts, it's pretty obvious you don't.
Those crucified with Jesus, one accepted redemption, one did not. There is a state of reprobate where a person having chosen sin and rejecting God perpetually is given over to their own choice. At that point salvation becomes extremely unlikely. Filth is a good indication that someone is on that road.
you should have cleaned up a bit the stench is awful.
There's no such term as "state of reprobate", you idjit.
Going to have to just ignore you , you contribute nothing of value to conversations and continue with your childish tantrums and nit picking.
You can't ignore me because you know you're caught red-handed.
It's really sad that TuBeTop seems unable to figure out that the term would be "reprobation."
What a friggin' moron.
"truth be told" – would we then be able to deduce from your assertion that a child that plays outside frequently, and soils his clothes frequently, would not be a good candidate for redemption?
@hal
It has already been determined that you are not one worth talking with. You are dismissed.
truth be told
"Those crucified with Jesus, one accepted redemption, one did not."
Very dramatic. And were their earthquakes, and a darkening of the sky, and zombies running thru the streets of Jerusalem and the temple curtain ripping? Oh, the drama. Pure schmaltz.
You are in error the resurrected were not "zombies" but those ancients who were redeemed as a first fruits offering to God. A promise of the resurrection of all the faithful to come at Messiah's return. Read the account.
Question to dq
Which way was the temple curtain torn?
But where are the independent historical records of earthquakes, the darkening of the skies and many resurrected whatevers walking around?
I'm sorry, "truth be told", but I'm quite confident that I may learn more insight into the human condition by analyzing posts, asking questions or illuminating unfounded assertions.
Isn't it funny that TuBeTop thinks it is some sort of professor who gets to "dismiss" those who it can't refute or who disagree with it?
@og
what darkened the sky?
I believe I can answer your question, "Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son". To effect the best answer, I will access my Idiomatic Equivalency Module. The most appropriate idiomatic expression to answer your question is "I get your drift, Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son".
I don't believe it happened. It's your mythology that claims these things happened, so you tell us how they were done.
http://teapartybubba.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/the-10-commandments-and-american-exceptionalism/
I was trying to think of an appropriate caption for that picture and it finally came to me.
Here it is:
"The Old Ones lurk at the edge of reality! They live beyond the realm of space and time!
Once again, Cthulhu will slither across the earth! According to my calculations, during the
next full moon Cthulhu will return!"
"With the appropriate human sacrifices, of course..."
(This is for all you Lovecraft fans out there.)
Atheists are nothing more than a vocal minority, like the gays. Both groups will rear their disgusting heads soon enough and both will be put down. 75% of atheists are gays because they couldn't find a religion that accepts them.
Trolling should never be this childish, or boring.
You're funny. Just hold your tongue and admit I'm right.
Do you get your statistics from pulledoutofyourazz.com?
I'm sorry "Obama = Communism = Atheism = Stalin", but the equation in your ent'ity alias represents a falsehood. If you would like readers of this topic to consider your posts with any degree of sincerity, I would recommend constructing a new ent'ity alias that does not represent a falsehood.
Your troll is bad, and you should feel bad!
There’s nothing as funny as a theist with hoof in mouth disease
Now let us bow our heads:
Our professor, who art in a lab.
Dawkins be thy name.
Thou science come, thy work be done, in the classroom as it is at home.
Giveus our daily facts as we make theories from those who fact check against us.
Lead us not into creationism, but deliver us from fallacy.
For thine are the universities forever and ever,
Lunch!
Go Bill Nye!!!
Kick those AiG guys in the nutz with logic until they finaly get it.
nuts not nutz
The major problem is when our politicians who want to keep their base happy by constantly labeling science as "the devil" that when society suffers. The republican parties nagging anti science rants are boring and holding us back from discovering the truth. The catholic church actually imprisoning Galelio for teaching the earth revolves around the sun not the other way around and this party is trying to bring us back to those dark ages.
A serious question for Christians. Can someone please explain how the death of Jesus was a sacrifice? We have the following: an omnipotent, omniscient, infinite ent-ity (God) sends a part of itself to Earth in human form (Jesus). Jesus lives for a little over 30 Earth years, is crucified, dies, is resurrected 3 days later, and subsequently ascends back to Heaven.
A sacrifice involves giving something up. But God would have known what was going to happen in advance. God knew that God had the power to resurrect Jesus. 30 years is essentially no time at all for an infinite ent-ity. Think of the richest man in the world lending someone a penny for a second, knowing in advance with absolute certainly that they will be getting that penny back. Where is the sacrifice?
You are attempting to bring logic to an inherently illogical subject. If believers understood logic (and critical thinking) there would not be any believers.
God sacrificed himself, to himself in order to create a loophole for a rule that he himself created. Makes senese to me.
Jesus had a bad weekend for your sins.
Yes, you're right; God knew he was going to get his son back after sacrificing him. There is a two-fold aspect to the sacrifice: one which brings humans out of guilt into relationship with God through no ability of their own and entirely a gift of love; the other, slightly more mysterious. Starting with 'the other': the Lamb that was slain, Jesus, was slain from the foundation of the world, as it says in Rev 3:8. To me, that means that God, in order to create man but knowing what would happen in Eden, had to give something up first, but with great difficulty; similar to the difficulty a human father would have with sacrificing his own son where he wold also feel the agony of the son. He had to give whatever it was up long before creation, but he knew the love he would have for man and because of that he had to find a way despite the agony he was about to embrace. There was a price that God had to pay that was far beyond the terrible agony of the cross and he paid if up front before the foundation of the world. Perhaps some of what he had to give up were the many 'sons and daughters' he would create, and love greatly, that were determined not to believe him, but would have to have their own free-will choices, including the choice after death to be eternally separated from God in what is described as an extremely uncomfortable place versus the other place called paradise.
@jim
That is quite a synopsis jim.
I can't think of anyone who wouldn't trade places with this pansy Jesus guy. If that was a sacrafice then we should be worshipping millions of others who have suffered far worse than a bad weekend and then whisked away to paradise.
jim,
" Perhaps some of what he had to give up were the many 'sons and daughters' he would create, and love greatly, that were determined not to believe him..."
An omniscient being would know *precisely* what it would take to provide acceptable evidence of its existence to *everyone*. No games. No tricks. No ambiguous trail of breadcrumbs, where if one follows the "wrong" trail, one ends up falling off a cliff. An all-loving parent would not give his 1-year-old a bowl of razor blades and then be oh so surprised and mournful when the kid is a bloody mess.
Either your god does not exist or it is a monster.
I agree, with the story at face value, it is no sacrifice. Jesus knew for sure that he was getting an eternity of paradise, so it was nothing more than a show to go through all that crucifixion and resurrection nonsense.
The sacrifice is in the infinite injustice in the suffering and death of a holy and righteous God. Anyone else in his position would have scrapped the universe without saving any humanity at all. And that is why the angels are mind-boggled at the magnitude of God's mercy. He is patient with sinners to an extent that is beyond comprehension.
2357 “Anyone else in his position would have scrapped the universe without saving any humanity at all. And that is why the angels are mind-boggled at the magnitude of God's mercy. “
Typical christian bullsiht. David Koresh chose to burn to death instead of scrapping the universe and 84 of his followers were so mind-boggled at the magnitude that they chose to burn with them
2357, Your explanation is that god is into S & M? So God could do whatever he wants and he chooses to suffer and cause suffering- again no sacrifice.
Scott. Holy doesn't just mean "held by some to be sacred". It means different. God is God. Koresh is koresh. We all deserve to burn because we sin. But God is different.
I dont sin, never have. And before you go on your holier than thou rant, I'm not an xtian. Sin is a construct of the judeo xtian religion. If I dont believe in the precepts of your religion, I dont believe in sin. Simple as that.
Donna,
The suffering we see and feel on this life is a mere taste of the full wrath of God in the spirit realm. I'm not saying this to diminish the horrors of history by any means, but merely acknowledging the vast difference in the scale of things temporal vs things spiritual.
2357, I feel sorry for you for living in such constant fear. And I mean that. Your god is abusive.
Donna,
My god deserves fearful reverence because his greatness is too powerful for me to stand, not because he is abusive. There is one who is abusive and perverse. He is one who slanders God and vandalizes life.
@2357. Get a life. Read a book. Think for yourself
"In Him was life"
St. John