The Official God Thread - To Discuss God and Seek Answers

[jordandog]

Issac Newton believed that the bible had a hidden message from God in it...oh and predicted the end of the world in 2060. You know Issac Newton was like one of the top two Scientists, EVER!!

Hmm, as far as the "hidden message from God"? Well, yes, but Isaac Newton is also now known to have had some fairly serious mental instability as do many who are so uber-intelligent.  He was convinced, from a 'sign' given to him, that HE was one of only a handful of people that God chose to understand biblical scripture. He also was fairly deep in studying the occult, but not in the sense of Black magic. It was more signs, predictions, alchemy, etc.

He did not predict the "the end of the world in 2060" or any of the other years written in his manuscripts, in the way I am betting you think it was. He believed the world was going to be replaced with a new one. In Islamic and Christian beliefs/theology it is what's known as the 'Second Coming of Christ'. In Judaism it is the Messianic era or the 'Days of the Messiah'. Newton was a student of Hebrew, translated many biblical texts from the Hebrew writings, and many of his unknown manuscripts, found after his death, are now held by the Jewish National and University Library. His translations and writings give a detailed chronology of Hebrew history and those he wrote on the Jewish Temple of Solomon are one of their most valued treasures.

No citings, from my memory, other than a couple names I had to double check.

[shellyvegso]

You know what , I may be a retard as you put it but at least I'm going to heaven who knows were your going!

[SurveyMack10]

When science can't account for something they even call it the God factor, or credit it to Creation, even in textbooks I've had for classes I've seen this. SCIENCE has the burden to prove the world was created another way if they want to disprove Christianity- we have the Bible.

It's the standard 'god of the gaps' theory/logic, it has been used for many years, and has been referred to by myself, queen, and Falconer that I know of. The one thing you all fail to realize is that science does NOT bear the burden of proof as to whether there is a God and proving that creation happened. That requires starting from a basis of nothing and 'nothingness' is NOT within the domain of science, but is within the domain of religion and creationists - so that puts the proving on you, the religious.

I have proof- The Bible, you just choose not to accept it as proof. However, you cannot prove your belief of how the world was created either.

[Falconer02]

I didn't say it made him a "full-blooded" Christian!  Just accept the facts as they are that he had some kind of fellowship with his Lord aka Maker aka Creator, etc. and was exemplary in his character, for the most part, and was popular enough for citizens to have wanted him to be president again, and the last time, he had to say no for health and other reasons.  Good grief, people do like to make mountains out of mole hills.....

Lololol yeah. And here I didn't want to turn this thing into a big debate! But your Christian Answers source pretty much said this. I just wanted it to be clear because there was preconcieved notion that he was completely christian.

LOL

I say the same thing about people believing in that fictional place too.

I may be a retard as you put it but at least I'm going to heaven who knows were your going!

You probably aren't retarded and nobody is going to some evil mythical afterlife unless you're speaking of some physical term of it. And please don't assume tribal curses on people.

[Falconer02]

The Bible, you just choose not to accept it as proof. However, you cannot prove your belief of how the world was created either.

Yes, because all of the fantasy stories written by primitive peoples are completely legit and that should be proof enough. You should really think about what you're saying here. We can't prove anything because we weren't there, though we keep options open. You don't.

http://www.jamesrb.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/2007-01-15-science-vs-faith.png

[SurveyMack10]

Just because a scientist doesn't believe in a personal God doesn't mean they don't believe in SOME FORM of higher power.

And there ya go -- always so quick to throw poor Jesus under the bus.    "Believe in a mushy higher power in general, but whatever you do, DON'T be an atheist!  Heavens no!  I'll get to converting you to Jesus later..."

When science can't account for something they even call it the God factor, or credit it to Creation, even in textbooks I've had for classes I've seen this.

It's called a metaphor.  I myself speak of god often...like when coincidences happen.  As a joke.  It's nothing to take seriously.

There are plenty of people who don't believe we even landed on the moon.

And those would be the loony bins I was referring to earlier.

The point is, we have our proof, you just choose not to agree with it.

Your proof does not qualify as real proof, though.  That's the problem.

If a book was found that said a meteor exploded and the earth formed with monkeys on it that turned into humans it would be considered proof, but since the Book says there is a God you write it off as being bologna.

Wow.  This is the silliest thing I've seen you write thus far.  Scientists do not just find books and treat them as fact - they need to pass the scrutiny of reality.  Which the Bible doesn't.  The fact that there's a being called "god" in it has nothing to do with it.

Ironically, it is BECAUSE you have a book that has a being called "god" in it that you think it must be true.  Like people have never fabricated stories about god beings throughout history...oh wait, they have!  

Explain to me why the Koran isn't true?

we believe what we believe, so we don't have to prove our God to you.

You do if you're trying to force your beliefs on society at large...which Christianity is.  You do if you're running around telling people they will burn in hell for all eternity if they don't accept your invisible friend.

Even if we did you wouldn't believe it.

If you gave actual real evidence, I most certainly would.

1st of all-  I NEVER threw Jesus under the bus. I was only letting you know that your hope that all scientists are atheists was wrong. I never tried to convert you nor do I care to, you bring up religion on this forum more often than anyone, and mostly just to bash Christianity. Since I've been posting in D&D I've seen no one try to convert you. YOU ask for proof and find ways to throw your atheism into the conversation just to discuss Christianity with whoever disagrees with you.

2nd, Calling something the God factor or referring to Creation is absolutely not a metaphor. It means they cannot account for it so they attribute it to coming from some sort of higher power. You may joke about God, but usually in scientific documentaries and such they're not trying to give their audience a laugh.

3rd, you refer to anyone who isn't an atheist and believes exactly what you believe as some sort of loony bin. Christians are loony bins, people who ever doubt science are loony bins, you accuse Christians of being intolerant yet you don't tolerate anyone who disagrees with you. I have absolutely tolerated your opinions and tried countless times to tell you that we aren't going to agree because I have Jesus in my heart and you do not, yet you can not agree to disagree.

4th,  you don't get to decide what qualifies as REAL proof. Anyone can say that NASA could have invented their evidence of the moon landing therefore it isn't REAL proof. I don't believe that, but many do. What qualifies as real proof to you? A written account of history doesn't.

5th, I'm not silly just because I believe in God, though I have seen you call just about every Christian on here silly at one point. I'm glad I've finally been included in that. I never said the Bible should be considered fact without passing scrutiny, but you cannot tell me there is not factual information in the Bible. Either way, you constantly ask for proof of Jesus when the Bible is there all along. No matter how many times we tell you that you can just write it off as not being enough proof for you, and that's fine. You can choose not to believe, but calling every Christian a delusional silly loon doesn't stop our faith.
Also, you don't know my personal beliefs on why I think the Bible is true. I will not get into that with you because it will be written off as delusional babblings and you will accuse me of trying to convert you. Either way, don't assume anything about why I believe why I believe.

6th,  I don't run around trying to force my religion on anyone. Most Christians don't, you just stereotype them that way and in turn don't tolerate Christianity at all. Furthermore, I've NEVER told anyone they are going to burn in hell so don't know where that came from. The only person I've ever heard say that on here is Marie.

7th, whatever evidence I provide will not be considered credible by you I'm sure, but how dare anyone do that with any form of science right? Science has been wrong plenty of times.

Hope I addressed everything, I'm doing an english assignment so sorry for all the grammatical errors and typos but I'm in a rush.

[SurveyMack10]

The Bible, you just choose not to accept it as proof. However, you cannot prove your belief of how the world was created either.

Yes, because all of the fantasy stories written by primitive peoples are completely legit and that should be proof enough. You should really think about what you're saying here. We can't prove anything because we weren't there, though we keep options open. You don't.

http://www.jamesrb.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/2007-01-15-science-vs-faith.png

Atheism would be the opposite of keeping the options open.

[jcribb16]

Quote from jcribb:
I didn't say it made him a "full-blooded" Christian!  Just accept the facts as they are that he had some kind of fellowship with his Lord aka Maker aka Creator, etc. and was exemplary in his character, for the most part, and was popular enough for citizens to have wanted him to be president again, and the last time, he had to say no for health and other reasons.  Good grief, people do like to make mountains out of mole hills.....

Quote from Falconer:
Lololol yeah. And here I didn't want to turn this thing into a big debate! But your Christian Answers source pretty much said this. I just wanted it to be clear because there was preconcieved notion that he was completely christian.I


Falconer, I gave you a link that you didn't approve of because it was a Christian site.  You gave me a link that would back your side.  I researched that link that backed you in some respects and me in the Christian life of Washington.  Yet all of a sudden that link isn't good either (your words: put it in the retard file) because it backed the fact that Washington WAS a Christian.  Can't handle the idea that some of your research, deep down delving in it, may disagree with your non-christian belief of Washington?  Like I said earlier, just accept the facts as they are, and move on.

[shernajwine]

7th, whatever evidence I provide will not be considered credible by you I'm sure, but how dare anyone do that with any form of science right? Science has been wrong plenty of times.

You are right Mackenzie, no evidence for the existence of God is acceptable to materialist scientists and the skeptics who cling to it's dogma like the milk of life. Materialism has an unspoken borrowed commandment from our Holy book....
thou shalt have no other gods before me. Science is their god, one man even proposed the idea that there is nothing science cannot explain to us about life. 

I've NEVER told anyone they are going to burn in hell so don't know where that came from. The only person I've ever heard say that on here is Marie.

I think queen has even marie beat in the amount of times she has posted about hell   

[Annella]

Quote from jcribb:
I didn't say it made him a "full-blooded" Christian!  Just accept the facts as they are that he had some kind of fellowship with his Lord aka Maker aka Creator, etc. and was exemplary in his character, for the most part, and was popular enough for citizens to have wanted him to be president again, and the last time, he had to say no for health and other reasons.  Good grief, people do like to make mountains out of mole hills.....

Quote from Falconer:
Lololol yeah. And here I didn't want to turn this thing into a big debate! But your Christian Answers source pretty much said this. I just wanted it to be clear because there was preconcieved notion that he was completely christian.I


Falconer, I gave you a link that you didn't approve of because it was a Christian site.  You gave me a link that would back your side.  I researched that link that backed you in some respects and me in the Christian life of Washington.  Yet all of a sudden that link isn't good either (your words: put it in the retard file) because it backed the fact that Washington WAS a Christian.  Can't handle the idea that some of your research, deep down delving in it, may disagree with your non-christian belief of Washington?  Like I said earlier, just accept the facts as they are, and move on.

J, I've read all your postings and they were wonderful.  Must be the teacher in you.  All the sites I get from qon also is from the "atheistic experience", to prove her points.  What about good old fashioned books?  History or otherwise.  I, for one, am not a big fan of YouTube for my proof of Truth.  Anybody can say anything and make a video.

[jcribb16]

Quote from jcribb:
I didn't say it made him a "full-blooded" Christian!  Just accept the facts as they are that he had some kind of fellowship with his Lord aka Maker aka Creator, etc. and was exemplary in his character, for the most part, and was popular enough for citizens to have wanted him to be president again, and the last time, he had to say no for health and other reasons.  Good grief, people do like to make mountains out of mole hills.....

Quote from Falconer:
Lololol yeah. And here I didn't want to turn this thing into a big debate! But your Christian Answers source pretty much said this. I just wanted it to be clear because there was preconcieved notion that he was completely christian.I


Falconer, I gave you a link that you didn't approve of because it was a Christian site.  You gave me a link that would back your side.  I researched that link that backed you in some respects and me in the Christian life of Washington.  Yet all of a sudden that link isn't good either (your words: put it in the retard file) because it backed the fact that Washington WAS a Christian.  Can't handle the idea that some of your research, deep down delving in it, may disagree with your non-christian belief of Washington?  Like I said earlier, just accept the facts as they are, and move on.

J, I've read all your postings and they were wonderful.  Must be the teacher in you.  All the sites I get from qon also is from the "atheistic experience", to prove her points.  What about good old fashioned books?  History or otherwise.  I, for one, am not a big fan of YouTube for my proof of Truth.  Anybody can say anything and make a video.

Thank you, Annella!  The teacher part of me is always trying to take over the front burner!

[Falconer02]

Falconer, I gave you a link that you didn't approve of because it was a Christian site.  You gave me a link that would back your side.  I researched that link that backed you in some respects and me in the Christian life of Washington.  Yet all of a sudden that link isn't good either (your words: put it in the retard file) because it backed the fact that Washington WAS a Christian.  Can't handle the idea that some of your research, deep down delving in it, may disagree with your non-christian belief of Washington?  Like I said earlier, just accept the facts as they are, and move on.

Woah there- maybe the words got jumbled up. When I said retard I wrote the retard thread referring to this thread. I never said anything about the link being retarded. And it's true; he might have been christian, but there is only small aspects here and there referring to it. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Was_George_Washington_a_Christian   He may have been, but without a doubt he was not a hardcore devout christian-- which was my point in this argument. That's all. It's just my opinion that he was a deist considering some of his later writings and what his close gov't pals thought.

I've read all your postings and they were wonderful.  Must be the teacher in you.  All the sites I get from qon also is from the "atheistic experience", to prove her points.  What about good old fashioned books?  History or otherwise.  I, for one, am not a big fan of YouTube for my proof of Truth.  Anybody can say anything and make a video.

Many of the links she posts are free-thinker sites. And if a utube vid makes one think or generates a good question, I see no real problem.

[Annella]

So what I'm getting here is the argument.......if GW was completely.....or a little bit Christian?  Is that what you were arguing Falconer02?

Many of the links she posts are free-thinker sites. And if a utube vid makes one think or generates a good question, I see no real problem.

However, you have slammed our sites that we refer to.  Isn't that kind of a double standard?  Just sayin........

[shernajwine]

Many of the links she posts are free-thinker sites. And if a utube vid makes one think or generates a good question, I see no real problem.

Oh no, there's no problem with that. There apparently is only a problem when a person who believes in God posts a link to anything that supports their belief and expects it to be taken seriously. Because if it even has God in it's title it is "broken from the get-go".

Apparently the only ones allowed to question scientific theory are those who are not questioning it from a creationists platform. The only science allowed is the science that says God is a delusion. The only answers you are willing to accept as legitimate are ones that agree with your preconceived notions of reality.

[SurveyMack10]

Falconer, I gave you a link that you didn't approve of because it was a Christian site.  You gave me a link that would back your side.  I researched that link that backed you in some respects and me in the Christian life of Washington.  Yet all of a sudden that link isn't good either (your words: put it in the retard file) because it backed the fact that Washington WAS a Christian.  Can't handle the idea that some of your research, deep down delving in it, may disagree with your non-christian belief of Washington?  Like I said earlier, just accept the facts as they are, and move on.

Woah there- maybe the words got jumbled up. When I said retard I wrote the retard thread referring to this thread. I never said anything about the link being retarded. And it's true; he might have been christian, but there is only small aspects here and there referring to it. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Was_George_Washington_a_Christian   He may have been, but without a doubt he was not a hardcore devout christian-- which was my point in this argument. That's all. It's just my opinion that he was a deist considering some of his later writings and what his close gov't pals thought.

I've read all your postings and they were wonderful.  Must be the teacher in you.  All the sites I get from qon also is from the "atheistic experience", to prove her points.  What about good old fashioned books?  History or otherwise.  I, for one, am not a big fan of YouTube for my proof of Truth.  Anybody can say anything and make a video.

Many of the links she posts are free-thinker sites. And if a utube vid makes one think or generates a good question, I see no real problem.

Right because someone who believes there is NO God is a free-thinker, but if you believe in one you must not be. Any site supporting atheism is a free-thinker site. Hypocrisy at its finest.