I do think He got better
zannahdoll
JoinedPosts by zannahdoll
-
17
Is Jehovah a Primate?
by Cold Steel inthe scriptures attest that adam was made is made in god's image, "after his likeness.
" and seth was in adam's "own likeness, after his image.
" the question becomes: since we're all primates, what does this tell us about jehovah?
-
-
-
76
The evidence AGAINST evolution.
by nicolaou innot in the fossil record, geographical spread or d.n.a.
it's certainly not found in the perfect 'design' of our bodies or the planet we live on.
without appealing to the supernatural or 'sacred texts' where can solid evidence be found against darwinian evolution by natural selection?.
-
-
zannahdoll
it depends on what is the definition of perfection...
Because something is perfect does that mean it only creates perfection?
Can something imperfect be made for the potential of perfection? (for the theist death isn't the end of the story...)
Could it be possible that perfection is reached in light of imperfection? Example: perfection could be considered what is good in ethics and love: It is easy to love someone who is lovable. It is easy to be kind to someone who is kind. It is hard to forgive when we are hurting. But to be merciful, to help someone who needs help, to mend what is broken, etc... Freewill...
-
17
Is Jehovah a Primate?
by Cold Steel inthe scriptures attest that adam was made is made in god's image, "after his likeness.
" and seth was in adam's "own likeness, after his image.
" the question becomes: since we're all primates, what does this tell us about jehovah?
-
-
zannahdoll
then logic would follow that God created woman because he was disappointed in man
-
17
Is Jehovah a Primate?
by Cold Steel inthe scriptures attest that adam was made is made in god's image, "after his likeness.
" and seth was in adam's "own likeness, after his image.
" the question becomes: since we're all primates, what does this tell us about jehovah?
-
-
zannahdoll
I can't speak for all bible readers, but for Catholics it isn't a circle. Catholics believe in Tradition, Scripture is just part of the Tradition. We trust the people who hand the tradition down to us and, we feel, the linage goes back to Jesus handing Peter the keys of heaven, Catholics consider Peter the first Pope. This is also recorded in the Bible (Matthew 16:18-19), however that isn't the only reason we believe that Peter was the first Pope: we had a second Pope: Linus, and then another and so on to present day: we trust the linage. So Jesus (God, Himself) gave authority to the Church and the Church gives authority to the Bible. Some doctrines were decided even before or at the same time the Bible was decided (First Council of Nicaea, Council of Carthage, etc). There is a level of trust, a leap of faith in the Church, and, yes, there are many churches not to be trusted... however, in my research I find that different Christian sects have their roots in Catholicism. Also: it is like believing something a trusted friend tells you versus believing something that a stranger or a known liar tells you. Even our trusted friends fail us at times (as sometimes the church and scripture fail us being that they are made up of or written by human beings), however, over all: we all take a leap of faith when we read something or hear something and take it as a fact or truth. We trust the experts in certain fields, we believe friends we consider honest even if our friends have imperfections. While the Catholic Church is known and famous for many atrocities, Catholic hold firm that the core teachings and doctrine have never changed through out time (some things can and may change in the Catholic Church: such as priests being able to get married while other things never have changed: the belief in the Trinity). Because of the consistencies of the Catholic Church they/we hold that the Church as a whole is a pillar of truth (it is individual people who mess things up sometimes). Science has often changed what we consider to be true: it was logical, even scientific to think that the Sun revolved around us and that the earth was flat: now we know better: however if we lived in the time period of long ago we would have trusted the "facts" as presented to us. In the future we may know even more: we may learn that what we think now is inaccurate as well and known facts may be disproved or elaborated on by future scientists.
Is the Bible the "pillar of truth" in the Christian religion? No. According to the Bible Itself, the Church is the "pillar of truth" (1 Timothy 3:15), not the Bible.
Here are some links that may say it better then I did:
http://www.catscans.com/catholicsite/bible.htm
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0009fea5.asp
-
76
The evidence AGAINST evolution.
by nicolaou innot in the fossil record, geographical spread or d.n.a.
it's certainly not found in the perfect 'design' of our bodies or the planet we live on.
without appealing to the supernatural or 'sacred texts' where can solid evidence be found against darwinian evolution by natural selection?.
-
-
zannahdoll
It seems from your comments that you've accepted evolution but perhaps not really jumped in and immersed yourself in it. Yes, evolution was/is guided - not by any supernatural agent but by non-random natural selection.
You don't know that Nice to see that you agree that they were guided. Also: just curious: what do you think of people helping those who are less fortunate or handicapped in some manner? Animals help some animals that are weaker. Stupid people reproduce all the time... Recessive genes immerse... I admit I don't know enough facts about Natural Selection... and this may be a huge jump but thinking about it reminds me a little of Hitler and his wish for a supreme race.
The problem is that none of those numbers describe the real world; ie. if one accept the methology used to arrive at them, it follows that pretty much any complex configuration of matter (snowflakes, mountains, beaches, etc) must have been explicitly created by a designer in their present form.
Yep. Not that I take all the bible literally, but I do take the concepts and teachings:
Even the hairs of your head have all been counted. - Luke 12:7
-
76
The evidence AGAINST evolution.
by nicolaou innot in the fossil record, geographical spread or d.n.a.
it's certainly not found in the perfect 'design' of our bodies or the planet we live on.
without appealing to the supernatural or 'sacred texts' where can solid evidence be found against darwinian evolution by natural selection?.
-
-
zannahdoll
Wow... this thread got a little Jerry Springer on us, I had to scan for people who were posting things actually relevant and on topic...
Thanks to those of you who replied to my thoughts and questions... Learning all the time!
Thanks for taking time out with your example. You say earlier in this thread:
Why, you'd think it had been designed, it would certainly look like it!
Complexity and the appearance of design are not evidences against evolution, they are evolutions triumph.
I don't disagree with any of this. Only to add (and this you probably will disagree with), from a theist perspective: whose to say that evolution isn't guided? Design and Belief in God are not necessarily against evolution. And the fact that evolution has a triumph may, again, point to a guide, a designer... and who is to say that something greater then all this started the whole thing? Who is to say there isn't a first cause?
You say:
Change the conditions and either life wouldn't exist (as the speaker suggests) or completely different life would exist and the argument would remain the same for those conditions.
We don't really know one way or the other, do we? How are we to say that different circumstances would come into play? We can only jump to conclusions that it would be so. But, even if it were so, even with different circumstances, what is to say that in order for life to exist that conditions would still have to be lined up: just so? The point I get from Lee Strobel and that video, regardless of if all his information is correct or not, is the unlikelihood of it happening, and not just the unlikelihood of one instance, but the unlikelihood of many, many, many instances - and that all those added up would be near impossible. For instance: someone winning the lottery and becoming a millionaire - it could happen. However that same person playing 10 times and winning a a million dollars or more each time? If that were to happen we would think the lottery was rigged. Doesn't science show us countless unlikely events happening over and over again in order for life to exist?
There are more fossil proofs than creationists make it appear, and keep in mind that the overwhelmingly vast majority of all life in the past did not seek to bury the dead or preserve the dead in some way to leave fossils.
I'm interested: where can I find these fossil proofs? It is fascinating.
I would say that what you say here is a hasty generalization:
Creationists then have to go to the preposterous contention that "Satan" has falsified the fossil record, what nonsense.
That might be true of some (the born agains, the non-denominationalists, the christians who go door to door and a few hard core conservative literalists in any faith sect) but I wouldn't say it is true for all. Many of us trust what we were taught and don't know, and some still see creations hand in part of evolution and think evolution is how it happened, and some say we don't know for sure because, well, we were not there, but we believe in God so we feel he had a part of it.
-
17
Is Jehovah a Primate?
by Cold Steel inthe scriptures attest that adam was made is made in god's image, "after his likeness.
" and seth was in adam's "own likeness, after his image.
" the question becomes: since we're all primates, what does this tell us about jehovah?
-
-
zannahdoll
You say:
Regarding our "image," the scriptures seem clear that we are in the image and likeness of God in the same way that Seth was in the image and likeness of Adam. If we start "spiritualizing" the scriptures to have them mean what we want them to mean, rather than what they say, we soon lose the ability to understand them, because nothing may be what it seems. The scriptures seem consistent on God having body parts, in that He refers to His mouth, His hand, His face, His bowels and so forth. And Jesus is the express image of the Father. Nowhere does holy writ say these things have spiritual applications, so we should take it at "face" value (couldn't resist): "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Gen. 1:26-27)
Right there in Genesis it says "male and female" he created them... So was God then a hermaphrodite? God isn't limited to the perceptions on males, nor is he limited to women's thinking. This isn't based on making the scriptures mean what I want them to mean. Personally I also depend on an old authority that is centuries old to decide: church teaching: it is the church and the church's followers that gives authority to the Bible (not the other way around)... I never was big on the whole "sola scriptura" concept. I depend on the traditions and teachings of my church. I am a Catholic - why did I choose to be Catholic: That is the real question. For me, in the beginning there wasn't a good reason: I went with the church that I was born into as a child. As a teenager and as an adult I questioned a few times why I should stay (actually going through another spurt of questioning at the moment): I feel, as far as christian sects go: Catholics have been around the longest with a lineage of Popes since Peter (our first pope) who was a contemporary of Jesus. Now, why am I a christian? That is a better question for which I do not have a good, logical answer for. I am Catholic because it is home, I have made bonds with people who I am not related to and now consider family, because the ethics are in line with mine, there are answers to my questions and it makes me happy.
However: regardless of my being Catholic, I think the general consensus for people who include Genesis as a part of their holy scriptures [Christians (most protestants, catholics, etc), Jews, Islam, etc...] do not believe that God was a primate, nor do they believe that God has genitalia, etc... I would bet that they agree that we are made in God's image because we have His spirit and love - I we are a REFLECTION of God's love.
-
9
What Are the Odds of YOU Reading This Today?
by Yan Bibiyan injws, as well as other creationists as far as i know, use the argument that the odds of life starting on its own, from a mere mix of chemicals are beyond the mathematically acceptable limits and therefore life must have been designed by a higher being.
my study conductor, a window washer by trade (no, really, this is not a jab at the guys choice of making a living) told me that those odds were calculated to be beyond 1:1x10100and statistically anything over 1:1x1050is considered impossible.
i can understand the odds.
-
-
zannahdoll
Yan Bibiyan
Why can't we apply it retroactively? Isn't that how we learn from history? Isn't that how we take a census and statistics... Wouldn't a person being born today, who, at one time was statistically impossible to be born, show that an impossibility IS possible? I apologize, I feel a little slow reading this. I know I'm missing something here... It still isn't clear to me. Thanks in advance for your patience with me.
I forgot to say before: Thank You for the welcome.
-
21
oh, what to believe! (everyone welcome, atheists and agnostics especially)
by zannahdoll ini was invited by a friend to view a thread that was 7 months old and i made my first posts in that thread but i think, being an old thread, i may miss out on talking to some of you.
so, for a fresh start: i'm going to repost a few thoughts and start a few new thoughts.
first: let me introduce myself: (don't make fun!
-
-
zannahdoll
>>Nope I did not decided that in the same sense I did not decided to believe either. I did not questioned my belief in god either. I was indoctrinated I was told I did not have a consious desiciion to belive in God. So that decisition was never taken. Well now that i realized that I didnt decided that then i just stopped believing. If you are driving a freaking car and the gas tank gets empty then you will slow down. because its empty. Why do you keep insisting that I decided to stop the car? there is no agenda. I ran out of the fuel that moved me in GOD's path.
You ran out of fuel and others still have fuel... do those with fuel then have an agenda? You say stopping your car is without agenda, so, to me this presupposes that someone who doesn't stop the car then has an agenda. All I'm trying to do is see WHY you ran out of fuel, when I still have fuel. I'm sharing my fuel... why doesn't it work for your car? That's all I'm asking.
>>>Nope, wrong. We can take desicions either good or bad. they have nothing to do with the facts. I did not decided not to belief. That would mean that I say to myself "uh myself lets not belief in God" --- "oh ok that sounds good" that... never happened.
That made me laugh! --- okay, so that never happened, in that manner... but it did so happen that you asked questions, that, while you still had belief you researched it, and, in researching it you found the conclusion that there is no evidence. Finding a conclusion = making an educated guess = decision. Your decisions are based on evidence. Some things, like deciding what flavor ice cream we will have or not to have ice cream at all when it is served to you, are simple decisions that follow your formula "uh myself, let's not have ice cream" --- "Oh ok that sounds good" while other decisions, such as were to live or what to do in a moral dilemma will take a little more conversation with oneself "should I live in New York or travel over seas? Will I get homesick... the weather is good here, it is more expensive there... etc..." or "do I let my friend cheat of my homework? cheating is wrong, then again they didn't get to study because they had a family emergency at home" or "do I let this person steal from the rich to give to the poor? Or steal food because they are starving? I am against stealing... but..."
An idea or concept of God was presented to you. Even in your definition of the word Atheist the definition is dependent on knowing the meaning of the word God. That is a revelation I had talking to you on this thread: Your definition of Atheist: lack of belief in god(s) - can you even define "atheist" without using the word "god" ???? So how do you discuss what it is to be an atheist without discussing god? Most atheist conversations are about the wrongs of religion, about how illogical the idea of god is, etc... the word Atheist presupposes that the concept of god(s) is presented to you. On a small scale: if ice cream is presented to you and you decide not to have any: that is a choice; it is a decision. You reject the ice cream. If the concept of God is presented to you and you decide that it is foolishness and you don't believe in it (again: the definition of atheist presupposes that at least the concept of god is known) so you don't believe in anything; you lack belief: you are rejecting what has been presented: that is a choice; a decision.
>>you have your truth but also millions of poeple in the world.. should we discuss everypersons truth to see which one is the truth? Your reality will be whatever you want it to be. I love my brain so I cant believe in something I dont have evidence or a way to prove it.
A few times here I mention how there seem to be truths for everyone... I'm looking more to what is in common, not what divides us. I do not agree with Mormon's doctrine, however I do tend to agree with much of their ideology. Among the nicest people are mormons. One mormon friend, knowing I was Catholic and not likely to convert, drove me home to San Diego, California from Salt Lake, Utah simply so I wouldn't have to buy a plane ticket. I only saw this friend once since... no ulterior motive, no try at a kiss good bye... (which I secretly wanted). There are many things I have in common with the mormons. And there are many things I have in common with atheists... What is true? What is kind? I am not asking to discuss "every person's truth" but what is, or tends to be, true for most people...
>>Theres no point of having a debate because you already decided that it must have been mickey mouse who spoke to you
I do not have my mind made up on "Mickey Mouse" or on God... hence this thread: hence the questioning. This is not the first time I have questioned it. This will surely not be the last. I feel I have learned from you... To say that there is no point in debating a person who IS questioning: well, to me that sounds like a person who has his mind made up.
Thank you for the welcome. I haven't been on debate forums like this for at least some 10 years, I used to debate and converse with atheists regularly, but at one point they have heard all you have to say and you have heard all they have to say and it grows tiresome... Just recently it sparked me again, because I do have doubts. I don't always engage in debates with atheists when I have doubts, but I am in constant doubt. The one thing is that none of us know anything for sure. I don't claim that. However I trust that things are true, and many times, when I am very comfortable in that trust, I do say "I know God is true" ---
I had visited a couple of catholic forums and found that there were not many atheists/non Catholics so I didn't feel it was a good place to gain their perspective. I tend to find atheists incredibly intelligent and genuinely love what they have to say, because I feel that people tend to innately come to the concept of God (many cultures, early societies and modern societies all have a belief in a god or gods - they all may disagree on the details about those gods but generally most people do believe there is one) so to explain away, what in my thinking, is a natural conclusion: you have to be pretty good. So thank you for the catholic forum. :) Although: there is some comfort coming to a board to speak with atheists were no one knows who you are... On a Catholic board: someone might know me! But, for me, it is home, I love the Catholic Faith: it is so beautiful to me. I think I'll check it out. The theology is awesome. Have you read any of the Theology of the Body? good stuff!
-
22
Do you like Sunsets? why?
by cyberjesus inpeople like to stop and appreciate a sunset.... but what is it they enjoy?
what do you enjoy?
who say its beautiful?.
-
-
zannahdoll
cyberjesus
Yes, we fear the unknown, however there are many unknown things that we do not fear. Why are some toys with infants and toddlers a hit? and others they are scared of? Both the toys they enjoy and the toys they are scared of are new to them and unknown.
Why do we enjoy the taste of some foods and not others? There is the nature and nurture aspect (we enjoy eating what our ancestors ate to survive, we eat what those around us like to eat) however there are times we stray away from this: My brother and I LOVE Indian food. We do not have any known ancestors in our linage who are Indian. Our parents never fed us Indian food growing up. Some of our family and some of our friends do not like Indian food (My aunt hates it). How did my brother and I come to like it?
You say you do not like Sunsets for some hidden beauty, that putting meaning behind it was a conscious decision...
I also enjoy Sunsets for no particular or specific reason... and I enjoy them independent of what others think (some people don't like them because it reminds them of the pollution: a lot of gas in the air can make some beautiful pinks and purples, there can be other reasons that people do not like sunsets...).
AFTER I see them I see meaning. I'm struck at their beauty I appreciate my life: that I get to enjoy such experiences and enjoy beauty, and the common experience of being human.
WhereWasI
Very well put.