Challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.

[YoursTrue]

Thank you for pointing out precisely why Science is superior to religion. It actually admits mistakes and corrects them.....

I do not think science is superior to God. If you do, go for it, as Joshua said more or less (I paraphrase).

 

[YoursTrue]

It is for all when it comes to belief that does not have evidence.

Oh? So that's why posts considered to be preaching are not allowed here? I mean one doesn't have to agree but oops, preaching not allowed. Science knows? I don't think it always does, even if knowledge is amended.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Oh? So that's why posts considered to be preaching are not allowed here? I mean one doesn't have to agree but oops, preaching not allowed. Science knows? I don't think it always does, even if knowledge is amended.

Science isn't proselytizing belief without evidence. You'll have to come terms with that on your own.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Right. No evidence. (lol, sorry ) And frankly, I doubt whether cockroaches, bunnies, and gorillas + others not humans, wonder about what's "out there" much.

I can't say, but I doubt it. But there is no reason to conclude they cannot evolve and their descendants not think about those things.

You are a believer operating with belief-based thinking about the world. I am a believer, operating with evidence-based thinking about the world. The former cannot supplant the latter no matter how much those holding that as a basis wish it to be. I think it is why it is so difficult for you to grasp the scientific concepts. It seems equally likely why there are communications issues. Plus you structure sentences in a rather convoluted fashion that renders them sometimes difficult to understand.

 

[F1fan]

I do not think science is superior to God.

Science has the advantage of actually existing. No God is known to exist, so how can you make such a statement? Note that your belief is irrelevant. No fact = no truth.

If you do, go for it, as Joshua said more or less (I paraphrase).

Your bias is why you make these statements. You like your religious beliefs, and dislike science. I suspect you are the only one who isn't aware of this, but the rest of us are.

 

[YoursTrue]

I can't say, but I doubt it. But there is no reason to conclude they cannot evolve and their descendants not think about those things.

You are a believer operating with belief-based thinking about the world. I am a believer, operating with evidence-based thinking about the world. The former cannot supplant the latter no matter how much those holding that as a basis wish it to be. I think it is why it is so difficult for you to grasp the scientific concepts. It seems equally likely why there are communications issues. Plus you structure sentences in a rather convoluted fashion that renders them sometimes difficult to understand.

The evidence provided by scientists certainly may not be analyzed correctly, as demonstrated by the changing concepts of scientists, including my famous dear scientist, Dr. Hawking. The Bible is, in part, the evidence I perceive. It's almost but not quite like medication. Not all works the same way for everyone the doctor prescribes it for.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The evidence provided by scientists certainly may not be analyzed correctly, as demonstrated by the changing concepts of scientists, including my famous dear scientist, Dr. Hawking. The Bible is, in part, the evidence I perceive. It's almost but not quite like medication. Not all works the same way for everyone the doctor prescribes it for.

If you think that is so, you are free to demonstrate that. Good luck. I hope you enjoy your Nobel. The conclusions of science may change, but those changes are based on evidence. Something which your claims and those of others promoting literalism seem to be sorely without.

The Bible is evidence, but not for what is believed about it. It is a book of claims that people interpret differently and and for their own reasons. Certainly, people get different things out of it, but people also try to force different things into it too. Literalism as I see it is promotion of works to attain salvation. Oddly, a condition not in the Bible.

 

[YoursTrue]

If you think that is so, you are free to demonstrate that. Good luck. I hope you enjoy your Nobel. The conclusions of science may change, but those changes are based on evidence. Something which your claims and those of others promoting literalism seem to be sorely without.

The Bible is evidence, but not for what is believed about it. It is a book of claims that people interpret differently and and for their own reasons. Certainly, people get different things out of it, but people also try to force different things into it too. Literalism as I see it is promotion of works to attain salvation. Oddly, a condition not in the Bible.

Thank you, but luck is not necessary. I do not claim literalism in all manners of the Bible, but I place my trust in the God represented by the Bible. That is another reason why I have looked more closely at what is called evidence presented by explorers and scientists. And yes, as I have found, the conclusions based on what is considered evidence does not always stay the same but changes as new evidence or thought arises. The Bible says, by the way, that dependance upon works for salvation is not a requirement by God. I'm sure you know this.
James 2:26 speaks of this:
New International Version
"As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead."
Now the thing is: faith in what? And what kind of works (or deeds) are acceptable to the God spoken of in the Bible that many believe in?
So, according to the Bible, faith without works is dead. But works without faith, seems the two have to blend.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Thank you, but luck is not necessary.

Evidence is, but you don't have that either.

I do not claim literalism in all manners of the Bible, but I place my trust in the God represented by the Bible.

Doesn't matter. Claiming it for any of the Bible is people demanding a stipulation for salvation that is not theirs to demand.

That is another reason why I have looked more closely at what is called evidence presented by explorers and scientists. And yes, as I have found, the conclusions based on what is considered evidence does not always stay the same but changes as new evidence or thought arises.

But for a theory like evolution, there would have to be incredibly robust and startling new evidence that is highly unlikely to come. The only reason that creationists cling to this seems more out of desperation and self-delusion that some triviality is going to blow the theory apart and lead to what they want to believe as the conclusion becoming the conclusion. It doesn't work that way. Science would have to find a better explanation and literalists and creationists would not be happy with that either. It wouldn't be based on what they believe. It would be based on evidence.

The Bible says, by the way, that dependance upon works for salvation is not a requirement by God. I'm sure you know this.

Duh. What have I been saying? Am I not writing in English? People that demand it. People. Are the ones claiming it. You and your faith group claim it.

James 2:26 speaks of this:
New International Version
"As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead."
Now the thing is: faith in what? And what kind of works (or deeds) are acceptable to the God spoken of in the Bible that many believe in?
So, according to the Bible, faith without works is dead. But works without faith, seems the two have to blend.

You are making an argument against something I did not claim.

 

[YoursTrue]

Evidence is, but you don't have that either.

Doesn't matter. Claiming it for any of the Bible is people demanding a stipulation for salvation that is not theirs to demand.

But for a theory like evolution, there would have to be incredibly robust and startling new evidence that is highly unlikely to come. The only reason that creationists cling to this seems more out of desperation and self-delusion that some triviality is going to blow the theory apart and lead to what they want to believe as the conclusion becoming the conclusion. It doesn't work that way. Science would have to find a better explanation and literalists and creationists would not be happy with that either. It wouldn't be based on what they believe. It would be based on evidence.

Duh. What have I been saying? Am I not writing in English? People that demand it. People. Are the ones claiming it. You and your faith group claim it.

You are making an argument against something I did not claim.

I am speaking of what is believed by some to be required by God.

 

[YoursTrue]

I can't say, but I doubt it. But there is no reason to conclude they cannot evolve and their descendants not think about those things.

You are a believer operating with belief-based thinking about the world. I am a believer, operating with evidence-based thinking about the world. The former cannot supplant the latter no matter how much those holding that as a basis wish it to be. I think it is why it is so difficult for you to grasp the scientific concepts. It seems equally likely why there are communications issues. Plus you structure sentences in a rather convoluted fashion that renders them sometimes difficult to understand.

That's cute. Kafka wrote a story about an insect a long time ago, if I remember. It does sound like a good sci-fi story maybe about a cockroach and a rabbit wondering about the universe. But I don't think I'll write it or read more than a paragraph or two if someone writes about it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Evidence is, but you don't have that either.

Doesn't matter. Claiming it for any of the Bible is people demanding a stipulation for salvation that is not theirs to demand.

But for a theory like evolution, there would have to be incredibly robust and startling new evidence that is highly unlikely to come. The only reason that creationists cling to this seems more out of desperation and self-delusion that some triviality is going to blow the theory apart and lead to what they want to believe as the conclusion becoming the conclusion. It doesn't work that way. Science would have to find a better explanation and literalists and creationists would not be happy with that either. It wouldn't be based on what they believe. It would be based on evidence.

Duh. What have I been saying? Am I not writing in English? People that demand it. People. Are the ones claiming it. You and your faith group claim it.

You are making an argument against something I did not claim.

The question is, do you believe works and/or faith with or without works make a person acceptable or not to God?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I am speaking of what is believed by some to be required by God.

So am I.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The question is, do you believe works and/or faith with or without works make a person acceptable or not to God?

It is not a question of what I believe, but what others demand and claim.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That's cute. Kafka wrote a story about an insect a long time ago, if I remember. It does sound like a good sci-fi story maybe about a cockroach and a rabbit wondering about the universe. But I don't think I'll write it or read more than a paragraph or two if someone writes about it.

Yes. The Metamorphosis. More of a fantasy, than science fiction. A story of man that was not in control of his life and being defined by all those around him instead by his own will.

 

[Sargonski]

The question is, do you believe works and/or faith with or without works make a person acceptable or not to God?

It is not a question of what I believe, but what others demand and claim.

Don't think it is either to be sure --- it is a question of what God believes and requires. According to the words of Jesus - in his most famous sermon addressing the topic Matt 5-7 .. "Sermon on the Mount" - in order to get through the gates one must do the will of the Father.. as opposed to believe the will of the Father. This is made clear in Matt 7: 21 - 21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven

Does the will of the father not "Has faith in" the will of the father.

This need to Do, in order to Do the will of the Father is reinforced in the passage before "By their Fruit" is how one distinguishes the true from the false prophets .. not by their beliefs. -

This requirement to do is then clarified further in the final summary of his sermon .. the "Here is the message you are to take away" Matt 7:24

24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. ...... 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”

It is quite clear that Christ is distinquishing between those that Do and the Sola Fide - "Faith Alone" crowd. Brother James Doubles down on this exact same theme/Question.

James 2 - asks the same question that has been asked here ..

6 But you have dishonored the poor Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? 7 Are they not the ones who are blaspheming the noble name of him to whom you belong?

8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,”[a] you are doing right.

12 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.

14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

Then answering his question - 20 You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless .. Then giving that evidence. Notice that both Jesus and James use the word "Foolish" to describe the Faith alone side.

James parallels Jesus in this passage and sums up the Sermon on the Mount just as Jesus does .. including reference to the Golden rule .. "The Royal Law" -- which is the "Will of the Father" referenced previously for those who were wondering what the Will of the Father than one must do to enter heaven is.

Jesus says - in my most favorite of passages from the man - Matt 7:12 - 12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

So Brothers Dan and YT -- The answer to your question is "The Royal Law" .. which "Sums up the Law and the Prophets" --- This is the sum total of the message from God that one needs to understand and adopt in order to get through the pearly gates.

The Teacher of Jesus and founder of one of the Jesiwh Schools of thought - Rabbi Hillel - Born 100 BC - whispers in to the ear of Jesus while sitting on his knee as a young Lad "Don't do to others what you hate - The rest is all commentary - now Go and Learn"

The above was a response to a non adherent by this most famous Rabbi (if for nothing but his age) to the challenge of reciting the Torah while standing on one foot.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Don't think it is either to be sure --- it is a question of what God believes and requires. According to the words of Jesus - in his most famous sermon addressing the topic Matt 5-7 .. "Sermon on the Mount" - in order to get through the gates one must do the will of the Father.. as opposed to believe the will of the Father. This is made clear in Matt 7: 21 - 21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven

Does the will of the father not "Has faith in" the will of the father.

This need to Do, in order to Do the will of the Father is reinforced in the passage before "By their Fruit" is how one distinguishes the true from the false prophets .. not by their beliefs. -

This requirement to do is then clarified further in the final summary of his sermon .. the "Here is the message you are to take away" Matt 7:24


It is quite clear that Christ is distinquishing between those that Do and the Sola Fide - "Faith Alone" crowd. Brother James Doubles down on this exact same theme/Question.

James 2 - asks the same question that has been asked here ..

6 But you have dishonored the poor Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? 7 Are they not the ones who are blaspheming the noble name of him to whom you belong?

8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,”[a] you are doing right.

12 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.

14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

Then answering his question - 20 You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless .. Then giving that evidence. Notice that both Jesus and James use the word "Foolish" to describe the Faith alone side.

James parallels Jesus in this passage and sums up the Sermon on the Mount just as Jesus does .. including reference to the Golden rule .. "The Royal Law" -- which is the "Will of the Father" referenced previously for those who were wondering what the Will of the Father than one must do to enter heaven is.

Jesus says - in my most favorite of passages from the man - Matt 7:12 - 12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

So Brothers Dan and YT -- The answer to your question is "The Royal Law" .. which "Sums up the Law and the Prophets" --- This is the sum total of the message from God that one needs to understand and adopt in order to get through the pearly gates.

The Teacher of Jesus and founder of one of the Jesiwh Schools of thought - Rabbi Hillel - Born 100 BC - whispers in to the ear of Jesus while sitting on his knee as a young Lad "Don't do to others what you hate - The rest is all commentary - now Go and Learn"

The above was a response to a non adherent by this most famous Rabbi (if for nothing but his age) to the challenge of reciting the Torah while standing on one foot.

I'm not really interested in getting into another debate and I don't disagree that it should be about what God wants, but the point is that it is often what people want that supplants that. A literal interpretation of the Bible is not necessary to be a Christian and gain salvation.

 

[Sargonski]

I'm not really interested in getting into another debate and I don't disagree that it should be about what God wants, but the point is that it is often what people want that supplants that. A literal interpretation of the Bible is not necessary to be a Christian and gain salvation.

Who said anything about a literal interpretation being required to gain salvation ? -- clearly you were not interested - in understanding what was written..

The question here is not about people supplanting what God wants -- which is part of the point in bringing in Rabbi Hillel. The question is what God wants .. and I care not whether it is from the Bible .. the Quran .. the Bagavat Gita .. or some volcano exploding.

How do you know what God wants ? Does the Universe not speak ? .. and if it does .. what is it saying and how do you distinguish this out of the cacophony. ?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Who said anything about a literal interpretation being required to gain salvation ? -- clearly you were not interested - in understanding what was written..

The question here is not about people supplanting what God wants -- which is part of the point in bringing in Rabbi Hillel. The question is what God wants .. and I care not whether it is from the Bible .. the Quran .. the Bagavat Gita .. or some volcano exploding.

How do you know what God wants ? Does the Universe not speak ? .. and if it does .. what is it saying and how do you distinguish this out of the cacophony. ?

That was the basis of my discussion. You might have done me the courtesy of following the thread of the discussion to find out what was at the core of it.

People declaring what they believe is the only way is the question here.

If you want to assume things for me and leave it at that I'm fine.

 

[metis]

Christmas aside, there are problems as I see it, with the validity of the classifications of species.

Again, that doesn't change the big picture.