So, evolution or creationism - the poll

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- So, evolution or creationism - the poll
Pages (7): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 »

Posted by Krypton on Mar-02-2004 00:08:

u may not believe anything thats in the bible, but this is the bibles reasons why we never evolved...

Genesis 1:26
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [ 1:26 Hebrew; Syriac [ all the wild animals ] ] and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Genesis 9:6
"Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.
-----------------------------

the bible had in it, every aspect of life covered. ask me any question, and ill find a bible passage concerning it. the bible gives direction to the lost. u people are classifyed as lost, because u have no idea, where your life is going, u dont know for sure where u go when u die, and many of you are undecided when it comes to many morality issues...

just ask me any question....

Posted by occrider on Mar-02-2004 00:20:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz

just ask me any question....

Well shoot, ok. Reconcile one of the quotations you made above

quote:

Genesis 9:6
"Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.

With the following bible quotes that call for the death of "God's images" in these scenarios:

quote:

for following another religion: Exodus 22:20 states: He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed. See also and Numbers 25:1-15.

for a stranger entering the temple: Numbers 1:51 states (in part): ...when the tabernacle is to be pitched, the Levites shall set it up: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death. See also Numbers 3:10, 18:7 and 17:13.

for proselytizing: Deuteronomy 13:1-10 states that a person who tries to convince an Israelite to convert to another religion must be killed.

for communicating with the dead: Leviticus 20:27 calls for the execution by stoning of all mediums and spiritists (aka spiritualists), both male and female.

for black magic: Exodus 22:18 states: Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. This is a mistranslation. The passage has nothing to do with Wicca or other forms of Neo-paganism, which are the only types of Witchcraft that are practiced today in North America in significant numbers . The original Hebrew word is translated "sorceress" in most other versions of the Bible. A more accurate phrase would be "women who engage in black magic, harming others by the use of spoken curses." Men are left off the hook.

Sexual grounds:
Other passages required people to be stoned to death or even burned alive for sexual activities:

for adultery: Leviticus 20:10 states: And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. This is repeated in Deuteronomy 22:22

for incest: Leviticus 20:11 states: And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death... See also Leviticus 20, verses 12 and 14. Verse 17 prescribe excommunication for incest with one's sister or step-sister.

for temple prostitution: Leviticus 20:13 states: If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death.... This verse is often incorrectly interpreted to refer generally to homosexual behavior. See also Deuteronomy 22:24. Both verses, in the original Hebrew, refer to homosexual prostitution in Pagan temples, which was a common religious practice in the tribes surrounding the Israelites.

for bestiality: Leviticus 20:15 states: And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast.... See also Exodus 22:19.

for sexual activity before marriage: Deuteronomy 22:13-21 concludes: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die...".. Note that this applied only to women who had been presented as virgin brides and could be proven to have engaged in intercourse before being engaged or married. There appears to have been no penalty for men who engaged in pre-marital sexual activity.

for sexual activity with both a woman and her mother: Deuteronomy 20:14 requires that all three be burned alive.

for being seduced if engaged: Deuteronomy 22:23-24 states: If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die. Note that this applied only to engaged women. Her fianc� could (in some cases) have sexual access to her, but no other man was permitted to engage in such activity as soon as she became engaged. There appears to have been no penalty for engaged men who seduced women.

for rape of an engaged woman: Deuteronomy 22:25 states: But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. A man who raped a single woman who was not engaged would only have to marry her and give 50 shekels of silver to her father.

for prostitution Leviticus 21:9 states: And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire. Executing someone by burning them alive appears to be reserved for a narrow range of criminal acts

In the event that these are not coo ... cooooo .... cooooonnnttt .... contradictions, should we immediately enforce capital punishment for aforementioned crimes? I shall now hang up and take your answer off the air.

Posted by occrider on Mar-02-2004 00:21:

Oh hell, there's a shitload more too

http://www.religioustolerance.org/exe_bibl.htm

Posted by nic01445 on Mar-02-2004 00:25:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz
just ask me any question....

Why was god talking to himself when he created the universe?

Posted by Krypton on Mar-02-2004 00:29:

can u see atoms?? no. but u know they are there, and u believe they exist. the bible says, god is with you at all times. u feel his precense always. even when u are in bad times, u think god/jesus isnt there, all u have to do is pray, and he picks u up off your feet. his precense is forever with you. ever heard of the holy spirit??

god, very much so interferes with daily life. but, god loves us so much, that he gave us a will. to follow him, or not to follow him. its your choice. there are consequenes for both. reward or punishment. and each consequence is eternal.

why? why would god send someone to hell in torment? what kind of loving god is that? many people ask these questions. does a judge slam his hammer down, and say to a convicted murderer, since i love u so much, i will forgive you. no, what kind of judge would that be?? people would become outraged. that is why there is a heaven and hell. a reward or punishment, liken it to prison and paradise.

why is it eternal? why not send those judged people to hell for a short time, then take them out?? many people ask this. sin is eternal disobedience. god is eternal, so when u disobey his eternal will, u have committed an eternal sin. so, if you dont care about your sin, u will be judged on judgement day, just like a judge in court would do. punishment or reward are the two options. and they last for eternity, because god IS eternity. if god was mortal, maybe it would be different...

but since, most of u dont even believe what the bible says, deregard the wisdom ive just typed out, and believe whatever you want.

but, again i challenge u, ask me any question, and ill find a bible passage pertaining to it.

Posted by Krypton on Mar-02-2004 00:44:

occrider, how are those passages contradictions. they are not. this is old testament law. where people were put to death for sins. u know why?? because jesus had not died on the cross. that is why there was many jewish laws that held execution as punishment for a sin. after jesus came, this law of moses the jews held, of execution for sin, very soon began to die out, and is nonexistant today.

but again, show me the contradictions...
---------------

nic01445, these might be the passages u are referring to.

Genesis 1:
3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day.
6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning-the second day.
9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.
11 Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so.
---------------------------

there is symbolism here that if u think logically, u can deduce what is the background message. and that is, god is so great, so mighty, so powerful, that he can simply speak something into existance. that is the power of god. the power of his very words can bring green grass from desolate deserts, new suns to form, the animals that inhabit this earth. and his simple words here...

Genesis 1:
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [2] and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

came with this result...

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

the power that is god here, is simple words. he speaks, his will is enforced.

Posted by trancepixie17 on Mar-02-2004 01:01:

** In light of all that has been said, I believe that we came upon in two different manners. As Heinz...and others have stated, I believe God did create the earth and that we some how evolved with survivial of the fitess(darwin) through the generations. Yet, I also have a change of mind since everything that has been studied by philosophers and so on, that we evolved from the "big bang" or what have you call it. I might contradict my self somewhat in this response so bear with me. Out of the choices it seems rational that either one or two are acceptable. Though, this, and all threads are really just hot-air, waste of breath, because we have no factional truth that any of this occured. No one knows for sure how we evolved here. All we know is that from the Bible and references and philosophies from others, that we evolved here from either of those ways. Even though the cookie monster is large enough to produce mankind, that is much undoubful.

Posted by nic01445 on Mar-02-2004 01:07:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz
there is symbolism here that if u think logically, u can deduce what is the background message. and that is, god is so great, so mighty, so powerful, that he can simply speak something into existance. that is the power of god. the power of his very words can bring green grass from desolate deserts, new suns to form, the animals that inhabit this earth. and his simple words here...

Genesis 1:
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [2] and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

came with this result...

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

the power that is god here, is simple words. he speaks, his will is enforced.

so you would agree that the bible is symbolic? or would you say that it should be accepted as literal?

Posted by DigiNut on Mar-02-2004 01:36:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz

I'm gonna end this line of reasoning and make it reeeeeeeeeeeeeally simple.

Simply stated, use of the bible as a "source" requires circular reasoning to accept (God's existence is proven by the bible; the bible is a valid source because it is the word of God. petitio principii, or begging the question, http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/begging.htm). Therefore, simply stated, the Bible (New testament or Old) is simply unacceptable as a factual source.

Honestly, I think we need to set some ground rules with these debates, the first of which being that quotes from the bible cannot be used to support an argument. If you wish to use bible quotes, then you must first establish the bible as a legitimate secular factual source or historical document, which means you must do so WITHOUT making reference to God, otherwise you fall into circular reasoning again and your proof is invalid.

I realize that this probably invalidates about 90% of Heinz's posts, but unfortunately, a logical argument requires sources with established credibility, which is a FAR CRY from a source with millions of contradictions! If you believe the bible is factual, you must establish this to the satisfaction of the skeptics. If you believe it is symbolic, than its use is irrelevant to begin with.

I think from this point on, I will no longer reply to any arguments from Heinz or anyone else that make use of bible quotes as proof, until and unless he can firmly establish the bible as a credible source; I urge everyone else to do the same so threads don't get innundated with pointless arguments based on nonsensical lines of reasoning.

Posted by trancepixie17 on Mar-02-2004 01:47:

** I know I'm going to get flammed on really bad now, but first amendment states that we have the freedom os speech. I understand that you don't care about what Heinz says, but the constituion states that ( which i assume you know.) Also, talking about religion and government, is really something you don't do in public because, there is no right or wrong answer....it's just perspectives, thoughts, comments, bias, etc....

Posted by nic01445 on Mar-02-2004 01:51:

Posted by trancepixie17 on Mar-02-2004 01:54:

** Okkk....that's pretty much what I had stated....besides it's all hot air...

Posted by Krypton on Mar-02-2004 01:54:

nic01445, u didnt get the message. literally, i believe god said the words, and it happened. but there was more than that, that u did not realize. because he can simply say the words, this symbolically demonstrates his power. humans cannot possibly fathom his glory, his power, his majesty, his greatness. and it shows right here in this debate.
----------------

i see where your coming from on this diginut. scientists use their text books, and continue to research new things. christians have their text book. it hasa already told us everything we need to know to become righteous people, good people devoted to god. and in the end, we are rewarded with eternal life by his side in paradise. have u heard the story of jesus on the cross, while he was dying in agony, how he still managed to witness to a theif being crucified right next to him....

Luke 23:
39One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
40But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? 41We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
42Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[6] "
43Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."
----------------------------

one day, u will see. i hope to look into your face on that day. the expression will be that of terror. i imagine the day i lay my eyes on god himself/jesus. i cant imagine my reaction.

Posted by Krypton on Mar-02-2004 01:59:

Posted by trancepixie17 on Mar-02-2004 01:59:

** I need tissues Heinz! that was the most beautiful message I have ever heard!... You are right. Everyone can imagine, but you dn't know for sure. Everyone is equal in the kingdom of God...(he's the king)

Posted by DigiNut on Mar-02-2004 01:59:

quote:
Originally posted by trancepixie17
** I know I'm going to get flammed on really bad now, but first amendment states that we have the freedom os speech. I understand that you don't care about what Heinz says, but the constituion states that ( which i assume you know.) Also, talking about religion and government, is really something you don't do in public because, there is no right or wrong answer....it's just perspectives, thoughts, comments, bias, etc....

Actually it's funny that you bring up the constitution (which isn't too meaningful in a private debate anyway, but let's assume it is), because what I'm basing my recommendation on is actually a well-established legal principle: judicial notice.

When a person is relied upon for expert testimony, his testimony may be refused if the person calling him as a witness cannot prove that he is in fact an expert witness. When it is not a human being but a physical source, like a technology or in this case, a book, it must receive judicial notice before it can actually be used as evidence. Many of the early radar/lidar cases got dismissed because the technology hadn't received judicial notice - it's the same principle here - even if the source is completely reliable and valid, it's inadmissable as evidence unless the presenter of it can prove that it is reliable and valid, i.e. explain where it came from or how it works.

Of course this isn't a court trial, but neither does the "freedom of speech" apply to a discussion among private citizens. Personally, I think North Americans need to start being properly educated on the constitution in order to understand that it does not govern private enterprise. Far too many people seem to think their "rights" extend to their own personal dealings, as in the case of getting refused admission to a club because of their age or their clothes, or in the case of being told to shut up when they have "freedom of speech", or in the case of being aggressively hit on when they have the right not to be "sexually harassed." Sorry folks, the constitution can't help you here - it only applies to federal or state laws that violate the constitutional amendments.

Heinz, it's unbelievable and almost insulting that you'd compare the bible to a science textbook. As far as I'm concerned, the issue isn't even worth discussing. You keep rocking on with your bible thumping, but I think from now on I'm just going to ignore those posts.

Posted by nic01445 on Mar-02-2004 02:13:

Posted by Krypton on Mar-02-2004 02:38:

quote:
Originally posted by nic01445
You still havent answered my question. You told me the symbolic ideas behind God speaking and then things happening, but never answered literally WHY God was talking to himself in the first place.

tell me, how do u express a command?? if your commanding something, dont u need to speak to command??

Posted by occrider on Mar-02-2004 02:52:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz
occrider, how are those passages contradictions. they are not. this is old testament law. where people were put to death for sins. u know why?? because jesus had not died on the cross. that is why there was many jewish laws that held execution as punishment for a sin. after jesus came, this law of moses the jews held, of execution for sin, very soon began to die out, and is nonexistant today.

but again, show me the contradictions...
---------------

Hrrmmmmmmm. So now that the new testament says that killing is wrong, and that jesus died on the cross so we wouldn't have to die for our sins, we can start ignoring parts of the old testament that no longer "apply"? That sounds vaguely familiar for some reason.

But, If that's the case, why does the new testament not specifically say that the old testament is now invalid? As a matter of fact, Jesus specifically "said" otherwise, "Do not imagine that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish them, but to complete them." (Matthew 5:17)

"if you do wrong, then you may well be afraid; because it is not for nothing that the symbol of authority is the sword: it is there to serve God, too, as his avenger, to bring retribution to wrongdoers." (Romans 13:4)

Luke 19:27, �Christ pronounced this judgement on those who rebelled against their king: �But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here, and slay them in my presence�(NASB).

15:1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,

15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
(Matthew 15:1-9).

Sounds to me like the death penalty is alive and well.

/Why the hell am I even quoting the bible? Man I feel like an idiot using it as a source.

Posted by nic01445 on Mar-02-2004 04:46:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz
tell me, how do u express a command?? if your commanding something, dont u need to speak to command??

My problem is who is he talking to? He is all by himself, and one day decides to create the universe. Why does he need to give a verbal command.

anyway, why are we arguing about this?

Posted by MisterOpus1 on Mar-02-2004 18:18:

quote:
Originally posted by nic01445
My problem is who is he talking to? He is all by himself, and one day decides to create the universe. Why does he need to give a verbal command.

anyway, why are we arguing about this?

I guess it's kinda like when I burp or fart, I always say, "excuse me", even when I'm by myself.

Cosmic habit. Cosmic manners. God has 'em both.

Posted by DrUg_Tit0 on Mar-02-2004 19:52:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz
one day, u will see. i hope to look into your face on that day. the expression will be that of terror. i imagine the day i lay my eyes on god himself/jesus. i cant imagine my reaction.

You know, believing in the bible only because you are afraid of the punishment if you do the opposite, and hoping that you will one day be able to mock and laugh to people who might have infact done more good deeds than you have but do not share your faith, will not get you in heaven. So, if the christian god and the afterlife exist in the way they are described in the bible, the expression on your face will be pretty much the same as it will be on our faces.

Posted by MisterOpus1 on Mar-02-2004 20:33:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz
nic01445, u didnt get the message. literally, i believe god said the words, and it happened. but there was more than that, that u did not realize. because he can simply say the words, this symbolically demonstrates his power. humans cannot possibly fathom his glory, his power, his majesty, his greatness. and it shows right here in this debate.
----------------

What's wrong with trying to fathom?

And furthermore, if God literally said these words, why does he continue to say them through man, and then man has to write them down? Couldn't God have done a better job giving his message with like, say, and earth-orbiting indestructible tablet of rules? Wouldn't that have been more appropriate from an all-knowing, all-powerful, glorious, majestic, great God? Why does an all-knowing, all-powerful, glorious, majestic, great God need to continue talking through a messenger (man writing stuff down in a book)?

Honestly, that really doesn't sound too much like an all-knowing, all-powerful, glorious, majestic, great God to me. I mean, Zeus did a much better job than that, didn't he?

quote:
i see where your coming from on this diginut. scientists use their text books, and continue to research new things. christians have their text book. it hasa already told us everything we need to know to become righteous people, good people devoted to god. and in the end, we are rewarded with eternal life by his side in paradise. have u heard the story of jesus on the cross, while he was dying in agony, how he still managed to witness to a theif being crucified right next to him....

Luke 23:
39One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
40But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? 41We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
42Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[6] "
43Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."
----------------------------

Jesus tells the "good thief" that they will both be in heaven "today." But how can that be since it's only Friday and, according to the gospels, Jesus lay dead in the tomb Friday night and all day Saturday?

Additionally, you pulled the version where only 1 thief will go to Heaven, while the other thief reviled Jesus. This is not what Mark.15:32 says: "And they that were crucified with him reviled him.", nor what Matthew.27:44 says:
"The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth." Both of these stories say the 2 thieves rejected Jesus. So which is it Heinz? Why did God have 2 different stories?

Furthermore, why did God not even mention this part of the story in John? Why the different accounts and omission? If this was truly written by God (through man, of course), shouldn't God have done a better job with accounting such events?

quote:
one day, u will see. i hope to look into your face on that day. the expression will be that of terror. i imagine the day i lay my eyes on god himself/jesus. i cant imagine my reaction.

Ever heard of Pascal's Wager? You just fitted the description:

http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/wager.html

Posted by trancepixie17 on Mar-02-2004 21:44:

quote:
Originally posted by Heinz
O.M.G.......i cant believe u just posted that...first ammendment?? nic01445 stated well. nobody is stopping me from posting, and im not stopping anyone else...who's breaking the 1st amendment??

IM GOING TO HAVE A FIELD DAY WITH YOU TOMORROW !!!!

** What did I do wrong?????!!! Besides......we had FCAT today and tomorrow so you can't do anything.....yet......haha......Well atleast I put something that has to do with political discussion

hm....i remember someone saying once they don't talk on the phone a lot.....

Posted by WhoaNellie1487 on Mar-03-2004 00:33:

quote:
Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Well, I'm sorry if I hadn't made that more clear, but I was reffering to "macro"-evolution, since "micro"-evolution is obviously true, as it happens every day. So if it suits you, replace the word evolution with "macro"-evolution. There, happy?

I have nothing to say.

quote:
Sorry about your name, although I don't see why people have to be so nitpicking about their nicks...

It's no problem,I just don't like the other spelling.

quote:

Now about the majority, yes, you're right. It was whether the majority thinks you made an immature and elementary breakdown of terms. I'll create a new poll on this one if it makes you happy

No,you don't have to. I just won't vote that's all.

Pages (7): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 »