| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
Mark, >>> And yet what is taught of him comes from a book. If not, then it comes from whatever interpretation someone has on their own and is no longer objective. How would you suggest we record the will of god? We didn't have video or mpeg recorders at the time. There is also one's conscience and the holy spirit. Concerning DNA, what Sifo stated. I'd be real interested in any plausible naturalistic explanation for how DNA accidentally came to be. For example, if God then asked me to kill my child, I'm likely to decide that this is no God I care to worship and would be willing to face the eternal price for standing up for my own, subjective morals. That is a red herring fantasy, but okay I'll go with that. It apparently allows atheists to justify their god hate. Imagining that you would know better than god is something really incredible. Ask Abraham. I don't think you are really considering the actual perspective of being personally confronted by the creator of the universe. If he asked you to cut off your pinky, would you do that? How about stand on your head for an hour? | ||
| Xl1200r |
I think it shows that you don't know what you are talking about and are willing to state anything no matter. I think it shows that I can see how different times were back then and chose not to waste my patience on a argument you'll never concede to. Reciprocal non-aggression is not the same as morality. What stops you from killing when you hate your neighbor and can get away with it? Jail, being taken away from my family, a respect for my community, respect for my society, respect for a human life. Nothing, it happens all the time. There's even a sport for it. When instigated by man... Lion's share a kill with the whole pride, rarely is that kill ever another lion when food is sparse. You may see yourself that way, but the grizzly bear won't agree and you have zero basis for thinking so. Eaxctly - I am because I see myself that way, not because God told me I was. And the bear is completely within his right to think the same for the same reasons. Now you are confusing emotional attachment with morals. Morals is doing the right thing even when it is difficult, or not doing the wrong thing even when it is easy and very rewarding. What emotional attachment do you have to a random box of puppies? I believe they're one in the same, only in some cases what you're attached to is not as clear and you have conflicting attachments to make the decision difficult. | ||
| Blake |
Mark, Whoa! You wouldn't believe how similar my own personal experience is to yours, almost verbatum! What brought me to faith was education. The more I learned, the stronger my faith became. That and gaining the conviction and courage to oppose all the absolute nonsense that the god deniers (usually god-haters) spew. Best cathedral ever, the Ladybird Johnson grove in Redwood National Park. I don't recall any reference by Jesus to nature as church building. In his time the Temple was very important, but that was MUCH more than a mere church building, that would be more akin to a synagogue. | ||
| Xl1200r |
How would you suggest we record the will of god? We didn't have video or mpeg recorders at the time. Exactly. I'd be real interested in any plausible naturalistic explanation for how DNA accidentally came to be. It's the same explanation for why anything accidentally came to be. I have brown hair. DNA is the reason. Dinosaurs had DNA, before Adam and Eve did. So many things in nature have perfect symmetry for a variety of biological and physical reasons. If you had a computer that did nothing but spit out random words and punctuation, eventually it would come up with the Romeo and Juliet, or the U.S. Constitution, or this very post. It may take billions of years but, then again, we've had exactly that kind of time. Imagining that you would know better than god is something really incredible. Ask Abraham. Who was 175 years old when he died. Can't believe everything you read. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Blake, You said >>>That is a red herring fantasy, but okay I'll go with that. It apparently allows atheists to justify their god hate. Imagining that you would know better than god is something really incredible. Ask Abraham. I don't think you are really considering the actual perspective of being personally confronted by the creator of the universe. I am not an atheist and cannot imagine being able to kill my daughter. He wants my pinky fine he wants my life he can take it any time he needs not my permission. However i cant say that i would be able to kill a child especially my own. I have to ask are you a parent? | ||
| Sifo |
Xl1200r, Your explanation of DNA addresses about zero of what I asked. I'll just repeat the whole thing...
| ||
| Blake |
I see Tankhead is back to share his light with all of us. That was quite a belch of hatefulness there. Really gets you to thinking, don't it? I took something out of context? Please show it. I'll happily correct. Sorry to offend you by spending so much time on the forum the past few days. Maybe you should avoid the place; it seems to REALLY irritate god-haters who like to masquerade as oh so enlightened thoughtful types just looking to get people thinking. Oh, if you wish to continue participating here, you'll need to enter your name in your user profile. Have a nice day. Try not to get so upset. It's just a debate. | ||
| Xl1200r |
Mark, Whoa! You wouldn't believe how similar my own personal experience is to yours, almost verbatum! Like I said, maybe I'll get to where you are some day, but I really couldn't care less if I didn't. There's no void in my soul I feel I need to fill. And I'm not a God hater, just merely indifferent. I know that at my core I am a good person, try to do good by others and myself. If it should come to pass that there are in fact pearly gates when I die and I'm denied entrance despite my life because I didn't accept Christ as my savior and formerly acknowledge the lord above, then I shall assume that God and Jesus are self-centered, egotistical, narcissistic jackasses  | ||
| Notpurples2 |
Sifo, I think the reason you're not getting an answer to your question about DNA is because this is a collection of gearheads and motorcycle riders. I'm not sure if there are any geneticists on BadWeB. I can't answer your question but I can hopefully ask some relevant questions. Wouldn't the noise you speak of be manifest by the diversity of species but filtered by evolution? Differences in DNA cause differences between reptiles, mammals, birds, plants, insects, bacteria, ect. But the noise and thus the closer links between them are filtered out by evolution. Can RNA connect in any kind of random pattern to form noisy DNA? Or is it more like puzzle pieces where only certain pieces can fit and thus there are certain limits to what can be formed? I haven't studied genetics or DNA in any real depth so I'm just guessing here. | ||
| Sifo |
Notpurples2, Thanks for the reply. I've got to run, but will get back to this. | ||
| Blake |
Mark, I think it shows that I can see how different times were back then and chose not to waste my patience on a argument you'll never concede to. The "chumps" proposition was just really dumb and also insulting to someone who respects biblical history. Most of these if god told you to... propositions are just really dumb, designed to belittle and malign those of faith. I wish folks would cease it. Posit something plausible and meaningful. There is nothing that would elevate human life outside of your own clan so to speak, above anything else absent objective moral values. Again, there can be no objective morality if there is no master gauge against which our behavior may be measured. Absent god, what do you propose provides that master gauge? If it is just how you happen to feel or what you happen to value, then that is no objective master gauge, it can easily change and be justified as you like. See naziism, and communism for example. | ||
| Xl1200r |
Most of these if god told you to... propositions are just really dumb, designed to belittle and malign those of faith. I wish folks would cease it. Posit something plausible and meaningful. I agree since the asker can engineer them in any way they like. I agree that nothing, morality or otherwise, can be objective without a basis for comparison. My argument is that morality can't be objective. If it were, I'd argue it more a result of "normalcy", but obviously that changes from person to person, region to region, sect to sect, on and on. Even within the Christian faith, there is no set of agreed upon morals which all follow - one church will claim that homosexuality is an unforgivable sin while the next will welcome them as openly as anyone else, and yet both are basing these morals on the same set of rules outlined in the same book. Imperfect men are interpreting what was written by other imperfect men... the result can't be objective. | ||
| Notpurples2 |
Blake is the proposition in the OP really "dumb"? I mean it's basically taken straight from the bible through the story of Abraham and Isiac. Genesis Chapter 22 2 And He said: 'Take now thy son, thine only son, whom thou lovest, Isaac, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt-offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.' Of course God didn't make him actually do it but we're suppose to believe that Abraham was doing the right thing by taking his son to the alter for sacrifice. And more bothersome still, God doesn't make Abraham do this to prove belief, love, or devotion but to prove fear. 12 And he [angel of the LORD] said: 'Lay not thy hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him; for now I know that thou art a God-fearing man, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from Me.' By that passage we're not suppose to think that Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son out of love, faith, or trust in God but out of fear of what God would do to him if he disobeyed. | ||
| Tankhead |
Out of context: You say regarding me. After you cowardly erased my post..... "it seems to REALLY irritate god-haters who like to masquerade as oh so enlightened thoughtful types just looking to get people thinking." When did I EVER say I hated God? Go ahead Mr Literal where? | ||
| Blake |
Andy, Are you not familiar with the story of Abraham? I don't think you are adequately weighing the perspective of being confronted by the creator of the universe. That said, I can fully see how someone would disobey god. We do it all the time over much more trivial issues. I just think that if confronted in person, it would be an entirely different matter. I'm not a parent, unfortunately. Didn't have my mind right earlier in life and kept putting it off for selfish reasons. Huge mistake. | ||
| Tankhead |
You keep mentioning this mantra.... ask Abraham. Are you speaking about this Abraham? Abraham first appears as Abram in the book of Genesis until he is renamed by God in Genesis 17:5. The narrative indicates that abraham means “the father of a multitude" (Hebrew: ʼaḇ-hămôn goyim).[14] However, scholars do not accept the narrative's definition to be the etymology of Abraham because, though "ab-" means "father", "-hamon" is not the second element, and "-Raham" is not a word in Hebrew. The word in Hebrew for "multitude" is rabim. Johann Friedrich Karl Keil suggested that there was once a word raham (רָהָם  in Hebrew that meant "multitude", on analogy with the Arabic ruhâm which does have this meaning, but there is no evidence to support this 15] another possibility is that the first element should be abr-, which means "chief", but this yields a meaningless second element, "-aham". David Rohl suggests the name comes from the Akkadian "the father loves",[16] but scholars would prefer an origin based on Hebrew. Seems like the scholars that you value so well can't even decide what the heck they are doing. The best part is the last sentence, they would prefer. What? It either is or isn't. Logically incorrect 100% Wrong. A is A can't be B when it suits you. Not Hatin' just rolling on the ••••••• floor laughing my ass off. Wrong again. | ||
| Blake |
Tank, I neither erased nor removed your post, nor requested it be removed. I'm not surprise another custodian would have though. I'll go ahead and restore it. I think it's germane to the thread and is revealing of your true nature. You never said you hated god. I deduced that from your behavior. It's glaringly obvious. | ||
| Blake |
Your post is still there, undisturbed and untouched. | ||
| Dannyd |
Blake, I know this is your playground but don't you think having a special section devoted to religious and political discussions would be more appropriate instead of them being in the quick board? In the past did you not keep them to the backfire section? Seems like you would want to see more harmony on Badweb instead of all these arguments that we see with these types of discussions. As I said it is your playground and you make the rules so this is just a suggestion for you to do what you want with it. thanks | ||
| Blake |
What about "ask Abraham" is wrong?  Nice you can entertain yourself so easily. "scholars do not accept" is about the same as saying "studies indicate". It's meaningless without specific attribution or at least a name of a scholarly organization or institution or association. I don't see your point at all. This thread is out of control. Care to answer my question, the one SDave won't? | ||
| Tankhead |
It was not an hour ago. You never answered Nonpurple's question you asked another question. Be Clear. Read. Comprehend. And answer questions so that the debate will be more enjoyable. I see you had a period in your life that maybe did not go so well. We all have that in our life. I am happy, but not surprised, that you have regained your mind with the help of a higher power. Good for you. I say that sincerely and am not being sarcastic. I don't hate God. I can not hate something that is not there. You are right this is fun. Good Job on being Correct. | ||
| Dannyd |
"This thread is out of control." I concur. | ||
| Blake |
Mark, If you had a computer that did nothing but spit out random words and punctuation, eventually it would come up with the Romeo and Juliet, or the U.S. Constitution, or this very post. It may take billions of years but, then again, we've had exactly that kind of time. No, not billions of years, an infinite amount of years. That illustration is more one to help folks try to grasp infinity. The idea that mere billions or trillions of years would allow what you claim is pure nonsense. It just isn't true. The only period of time that allows the type of order from chaos like you state is an infinite amount of time. No finite amount of time will do it. The universe and time are not infinite so your explanation falls short. It's a popular myth spread by overzealous evolutionists. But then science proved that time and the universe actually had a finite beginning. | ||
| Dannyd |
But the big question is what is at the end of the universe? Is it another universe just like ours, possibly a twin? Is there a way to cross from one universe to the other? The possibilities are endless!!! | ||
| Tankhead |
By stating ask abraham, the reader might not know what or who you are talking about, first point. Second point is, how do you believe in the story of Abraham if the people who have translated things as simple as his name, let alone the story, can not be concrete. Wouldn't an intelligent man like yourself (not being sarcastic) want to question the validity everything else in the bible if the translation could be left for debate. If your answer is no, and that is fine, then I really do not see the point of debating anymore with you. There would be no point and we can agree to disagree. And that is fine too.. I think it might be better for us all if you told us what you believe so that we know exactly where you stand in the other post. I deliberately did not divulge my beliefs because I wanted to play devils advocate by getting people to think for themselves by offering differing ideas from yours. Sorry if you were offended by that, wasn't meant to be professor like or anything like that. I have read countless other posts by you and whether you like it or not you do offend many here. | ||
| Blake |
Curtis (Notpurple)m Yes, it is dumb given the difference in the situations. Abraham lived under the old covenant where sacrifice was required. We live under the new covenant and no such literal sacrifice is required. It is dumb when the OP asked the question then in responding to answers changed the question entirely to one of "voices in your head" and the like. That was REALLY dumb, not to mention dishonest. You just cannot have a meaningful debate with someone who employs that kind of nonsense. | ||
| Xl1200r |
The only period of time that allows the type of order from chaos like you state is an infinite amount of time. No finite amount of time will do it. Yeahbutt........ As was pointed out before, DNA is not completely random. On the parts that work are allowed to carry forward. Parts that don't are ditched. This means you aren't starting over everytime to give it another shot - you're starting one step ahead of the last time you tried. With that in mind, a finite amount of time is plausible. And.... They can estimate the "beginning of time" - the number appears to be 13.7 billion years ago. However, that figure is from the time of the Big Bang and they have no idea if something existed before that. This stuff gets my brain churning. I remember laying awake as a kid and wondering, "what's at the end of space? Hmm... must be a concrete wall or something. But... what's on the other side of the wall? How thick is the concrete?" etc etc. I have no idea the real answer, but I've convinced myself that there's some serious black hole crap going on and you can never reach the end - you just kind of pas through and come out the other side somewhere. Admittedly, my beliefs are inspired by some the science from Event Horizon.. | ||
| Blake |
Dan, >>> But the big question is what is at the end of the universe? Is it another universe just like ours, possibly a twin? Is there a way to cross from one universe to the other? The possibilities are endless!!! There is a fairly new "multi-verse" theory that Hawking and friends scrambled to put together once they realized the implications of proving the big bang along with the finding of an ever expanding universe. It involves a bunch more dimensions, eight I think? I don't recall. I think since they've proved god exists, they are getting onto where he lives. LOL. | ||
| Drkside79 |
>>>>But the big question is what is at the end of the universe A restaurant | ||
| Blake |
Mark, I think wrt evolution you may have a point. My point concerns the implausibility of abiogenesis, life from non-life, DNA from gook. It just can't happen by purely naturalistic mechanisms. It would be highly advanced perfectly concise order out of chaos. It's like saying that randomly from gook can arise advanced computer programming. |
