<snipped graphic image>
Search for 'birth defects' and you will find lots of disturbing images like this one - some look barely human
Well, it was obvious from the get go you weren't going to get any reasonable or rationale feedback from believers, and what was provided so far completely ignores reality and the facts.
Did the believers take into consideration that other believers who don't "follow the path of "mother nature" or "evolution" also have children with birth defects?
Do the believers take into consideration that the most pious and righteous amongst them also have children born with defects?
No, they fabricate more fantasies to support their irrational beliefs and rather than attempting to deal with the issue, they simply sweep it under their holy carpets and resort to the myths of Adam and Eve, throwing up their hands in blissful ignorant defeat.
It would actually be funny if it wasn't so sad.
We live in a fallen world. All imaginable things can happen.
that's a simplistic answer from someone that has a pre-scientific view of the world
Simplistic, yes ... but may I suggest that demanding that untrained theologians defend their faith with scientific accuracy is analogous to asking you to accept something on blind faith.
A person trained in Algebra may be prepared to see trigonometry, but they probably can't handle second order differential equations. You are asking valid questions. The fact that not many people are prepared to give you satisfactory non-simplistic answers says as much about your education and path as it does about theirs ... it does not however, answer the questions.
To give someone with your intelligence and scientific training an intellectually valid argument, you may want to look into the writings of C.S Lewis and Dietrich Bonhoeffer ... they will not necessarily change your mind, but you will at least find a more analytical approach than you will likely find among more average church goers.
I don't say this to insult the average church goer, but to acknowledge the integrity of your search.
I'd also recommend reading a biography or two of each of them so you can get a context of their point of view.
At the very least you'll see a more reasoned theological approach than you normally find. To answer your question regarding the birth defect, you may find Lewis' "The Problem of Pain" to be intellectually interesting, even if you don't find yourself in full agreement with the author's conclusion.
in a nutshell, did CS Lewis and Dietrich still come back to the sin and freewill argument?
A person doesn't need to understand the mechanisms of how birth defects & cancer etc happen but can accept that their doctor does ie it is not supernatural and it is not the fault of the person who it happened to.
One thing that bothers me a lot about christianity, is it sees humans as worthless pieces of sh!t that need a supernatural power to rescue them from the pain and suffering that the supernatural being set up in the first place
I read CS Lewis's fiction as a child (apparently allegory for bible stories)
His children's stories, while entertaining are not his scholarly work. I loved the first couple of Narnia books, but as you say, those are children's books.
If you have drawn you conclusion so be it, but to write them off because you think you already know what they are going to say is not quite open minded.
Bonhoeffer was born into a family of scientific German aristocrats who would not let him publish anything short of the academically excellent and truly logical. He actually observed a great deal that you have also observed.
His letters from when he was in prison before he was executed by the Gestapo for his role in the attempt to assassinate Hitler are not exactly the "turn or burn" stuff you're used to seeing. He had a first hand look at true evil and was quite aware of the church's role in bringing Hitler to power.
If you don't want to look, that's fine and after you've given it a good read and you're ready to write it off, that's fine too, but they aren't evangelists, they are thinkers. You may discover you have more in common with them than you think or maybe not.
The real answer to your question is you can't put reality in a nut shell and you can't put Lewis and Bonhoeffer in a nut shell either. The problem is that people tried to put God in a nutshell and when he doesn't fit neatly, they act like it's his fault for not fitting their in the box theology.
If I could have put it in a nut shell I would have If it will make you feel better a lot of fundamentalists think they were heretics.
I looked up some of their quotes - sounds like they were thinkers
I'm reading Bonhoeffer's biography now. It's interesting to see his view of a pre-World War 2 America. I fear that with American imperialism, we have also spread American theology .... and have attempted to impose American culture on our understanding of the bible. I doubt he would find most of our churches agreeable.
I've ordered a few more of his books. I feel cheated that I never even knew of them until this late in my adult life.
I see the image was promptly snipped. There are plenty of images of birth defects on the net if anyone is brave enough to look.
Makes you wonder how a loving god can exist - the horror of giving birth to a child with its brain oozing out, or no brain at all, or legs fused together, or skull misshapen etc - and then knowing that the child will die.
How can people live in their "god is so good" fantasy?
If this life is all that there is, your point would be 100% valid.
If this life is but a short span of time that exists between two spans of eternity (past and future) then sorrow takes on a different meaning.
and what meaning would that be - the hope that things would be made right?
merely that the lessons God teaches are not average lessons and hard to walk away from. Truth this life is both short and approximately unimportant. There is life in all living beings, life that belongs to God. All parents want completely whole, healthy children, that seems natural. Christlikeians are not natural we are spirit our path is spirit. Although it seems unfair in the natural that the child did not get to enjoy this earth we must recall that this earth is but a stepping stone. While many B.D. children have short lifespans the messages and love and valuable lessons they teach to all are priceless, and no doubt, God takes them home (they get a new body and that's gonna excite them more than the hotties of this world now-no genitals or boobs lol)
Did God shape them or did God allow it to happen? Well we were not there. Did God try to warn them? Did the doctor say not to have it. Does God interfere in the paths of the ungodly? Or by his mercy reverse their situation?
If there were no birth defects then would that be proof of God? or would we lalala through life never having suspected?
So many questions. I am not qualified to answer this never having to have faced this situation.
I see in another thread some found this post deeply offensive. Why is it taboo to ask a question about something that really happens? Do people like to live in their "the world is such a nice place" fantasy-land?
Because people infuse their Faith with a sense of moral authority, undeniable metaphysical truth and ultimate goodness. For anyone to deny it both implies they (the believer) are credulous (which they vehemently deny) AND that the nay-sayer hates their God and everything good. People don't just identify with their Faith, they infuse their entire life's purpose into it. Without it, they believe, they would be nothing. Insignificant. Worthless. With it, they are god's chosen people. It's like telling an orphan their adopted parents are liars, only worse.
Well, they sure as hell don't contribute to the survival of new creatures on an evolutionairy scale.
Intelligent design refers to the fact that God created mankind in His image. He created the first man Adam perfectly, and Eve also.
When they sinned, it opened the door to all kinds of sickness, disease, malformation and such. This is illustrated in the Bible by stories of lepers and demon-possessed people and lame and blind, etc.
I'm not saying that anyone sinned in order for that child to be malformed, because the Bible states differently! What I am saying is that humanity, when allowed to follow the path of "mother nature" or "evolution" instead of adhering to the original will of God, is weak and imperfect.
If that image is of a real child, let me tell you that God knows about it, living or dead, and Loves that child just as much as anyone else, and cares for its soul and spirit. He will take care of his or her soul/spirit.
But I have something else to say here.
Last I saw, any images of children in or out of the womb that stands up for a child's right to life have been considered improper and were deleted from these forums. So I hope that the image you posted gets deleted too, because it can be used by abortion proponents to further their agenda.
this child would have died shortly after birth - it has no brain.
The sin excuse is the one that creationists come up with?
http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/art … t-abortion
If god really "knitted us together in the womb", it looks like he didn't do a very good job of many. Also, it seems like a horendous punishment for eating a piece of fruit
Baileybear, You have misunderstood many sciptures of the bible. When you understand the true meaning of God's word, it will make a big difference in your life, and you will recieve your breakthrough. Will you kindly explain how creationists come up with a sin excuse? The bible states when Adam and Eve sinned, it opened the door for imperfections in this world today. It's not fair to blame and falsely accuse God for any wrongdoing.
Eve ate a piece of fruit, so god punishes with horrors like cancer and birth defects - believers and non-believers alike - what a joke
What's really funny is that believers keep reiterating that Adam & Eve were perfect...but how could two perfect beings do such an imperfect thing.
The answer is always, free-will. But if they were perfect, they would have chosen the RIGHT(perfect)path, regardless of free-will.
well to be fair, i think they're referring to the fact that they were physically perfect, and not necessarily perfect people in general that knew everything.
Just how insane is this gonna get?
This is all BS. Once a lie is told, it morphs into another lie, then another, then another.
okay, so by going by your logic are you saying that all good looking perfectly genetic people are perfect in every fathomable way? either via morally and intellectually? is that what your saying? you have to remember just because someone is physically perfect, it doesn't make them smarter or have a higher moral value.
edit: besides, im speaking hypothetically here. sheesh, you don't need to be so rude about it.
After all, the term perfectly designed could be referring solely to genetics alone
No, I'm just saying the whole crappy story of the Garden of Eden is childish, primitive nonsense...in other words, BS.
There was NO Adam & Eve. That whole story is absurd. Does that make sense?
well to each their own, is what i say. However, i was just saying that perhaps the whole Adam and Eve were perfect scenario might have been referring them being perfect genetically wise, and not necessarily intellectual wise if you catch my drift. that's all i was trying to point out.
however, i get what your saying now though. I just think the whole adam and eve bit being perfect only applies them physically and not over all is what i was getting at.
Your feeling is wrong. I did comprehend what you were conveying, exactly. I was not being condescending, just a straightforward, concise reply.
oh i know. i just realized that after i reread your post, so i deleted my response. sorry if i came off as a jerk though in that statement, as i wasn't sure if my comment was going to come off offensive, as that was another reason why i deleted it. however, we're good.
doesn't seem very fair if they weren't very smart to have god allow them to be tricked, and then make the whole of the human race suffer. This is absurd
adam named the animals. This doesnt speak of dumb. He had a working vocabulary and an alphabet. He could obviously think. It would have been difficult to name the animals of the garden. (not all the animals of the earth just the animals in the garden)
Being tricked does not come down to adam. Eve was tricked. Adam went along because he loved her more than God.
Was eve blonde? we do not know. We know she was selfish and liked to make her own decisions without consulting Adam. We know she didn't appreciate Gods one rule and we know she was made from adams flesh and adam was made, directly from the dust of the ground. There must be some difference between dust and flesh.
God didn't make the whole human race suffer. The statements he makes to them in the garden. Does God really sound mad? or just factual? There was going to have to be a price to pay for letting sin ruin Gods society. (recall, sin is like a viral disease, it spreads and realise also that i do not believe the fruit was a fruit or the snake a snake) but anyway.... deeper doctrine aside....
They were outside the garden now and they had babies, who had babies, who had babies, who had babies, who had babies...etc...etc... until you were born.... outside the garden.
You are not in a punishment situation you are in a location situation.
yes, but he did tell adam and eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge, but they did. therefore, he didn't allow them to be tricked. they allowed themselves to be tricked by not following that one rule god wanted them to follow.
Assuming god as all-knowing, almighty(as per religion) this is absurd. Puppet's choice is based on puppet masters will. All the choices that life takes (which was created by god as per theists assumption) is under the probability of god's intellect. And as if god is not aware that they'll not perform that action even after warning ? Flaw is in puppet master and not in puppets.
i understand what your saying, but here's what im saying. would you rather if god did act like an almighty puppet master and manipulated your free will to do whatever he wants, or would you rather have free will? you can't have it both ways. although i do agree with you that god probably did know that there was a possibility adam and eve would disobey him, he didn't want to hinder their free will. kind of like how he's not manipulating yours or mine right now.
lot of assumptions and contradictions in you reply.There is no free will to begin with. take example ôf cards its game of probability.if god exists and is all knowing then free-will is just illusion. what makes you so sure if god exist then he's not manipulating you?
assumptions? i wasn't assuming anything. im merely speculating and presenting a hypothesis. that's all. however, if you choose to interpret it that way, then that's your business. I never assumed anything, as I really don't know. I'm just speaking in hypothetical terminology right now.
your right, in a game of cards, it is based on chance and probability. however, YOUR CHOICE to play cards to begin with or not to play is a part of what free will is. just like you have the choice everyday NOT to show up to work if you want to, and tell your boss to piss off. sure, he/she can fire you for that, and it's not a choice you like, but that is a choice. just like in a war, you say there's no choice. however, a soldier does have a choice. kill or be killed. that's his choice. he doesn't have to like it, but those are his choices. in life, you always have free will, and you always have a choice. Like you choose not to believe in god. are you telling me that your not believing in religion based on chance? are you serious?
if your that convinced there's no such thing as free will, then maybe you should buy a gun and shoot yourself in the head. after all, we're all going to die someday, so why prolong the inevitable if your life isn't even your own, and you don't have any choices in your life. sounds pretty dull to me. if you say life doesn't have free will, then i say everyone in the world should shoot themselves in the head right now, as life wouldn't be worth living if you ask me.
as far as me being so sure that god isn't manipulating my free will to begin with, the truth is i don't. i just believe he doesn't. besides, if that was the case, then wouldn't we all think and act exactly the same if god manipulated our free will? sounds like a lot of work if you ask me, so i doubt he does. however, if he does and you can prove it, then i guess i should off myself right now.
Yes. Assumptions. Take 1 for example "kind of like how he's not manipulating yours or mine right now.. You can check the same reply of yours for other assumptions.
Considering your assumption of god exist and he's all knowing, all the choices that life makes falls within known probability by almighty. So your assumption of life created by intelligent being having a free will is assumption and that contradicts with intelligent god being all-knowing. Either you have free and god is not all knowing, or god is all knowing and you have no free will. Simple.
As a person who is obsessively curious towards universe and one who wants to survive i prefer not to take this action. This action will performed by me only when my thought process is mixed up with emotional bias and surrounding that could force me to take such decision. Poor way you put it here that not having free will should make people shoot their head. I still don't get it why people should trigger it if the natural selection tempts us to multiply our species and expects survival.
Why prolong ? simple. your this question begs for sadistic action which people who look optimistically will not take. Choice to survive and live happy life and choices which are guided by intelligent being are entirely different. Choices which are guided by intelligent being are sadistic that begs to shoot your own head or receive punishment in hell if you commit sin or do harm to your own life.
That's because your way to look at life is religious and a bit sadistic when you presented that shooting gun example.
Exactly, that's why i said it was your assumption.
No. Even if almighty manipulates humans still then all life will think differently because our actions are based on feedbacks to past experiences, environment, fear and other triggers passed by brain.
LOL. emotional bias. God who created this universe will be tired of simple chemical manipulation in your brain ? see, i'm helping you here to believe in god
well for the record, the whole shooting yourself in the head bit was a bit extreme, but it was meant to be a joke. not as a "please shoot yourself if you think this way" type of scenario. i guess i probably should've been more clear about that. my bad.
anyways, i have my own theory on religion and evolution that i discussed in another forum, so this whole adam and eve concept doesn't even apply to me, as i don't believe in the literal terminology of that story if that makes sense. lol. i was just saying my remark earlier about adam and eve being genetically perfect only because that's what i felt the other hubbers trying to defend that story were alluding to, that i felt many atheists here were missing on. that's all. however, if you really want to know my theory behind the whole adam and eve story, then i can gladly give you the link if you like.
exactly....and there is so much other illogical crap as well
Christian get it wrong; only the Creator-God is perfect; man is apt to err as is said to err is human. The term perfect men is only a relative term; the Messengers Prophets (like Krishna, Moses, Jesus, Zoroaster, Buddha) are said to be perfect in the sense that they don't sin; they could make mistakes.
Express what you think to be the right with reasons and brilliant arguments, please.
There is no evidence for the existence of a god. That includes whatever god you worship, too.
And your god, which there is no evidence of, has not an iota of evidence that he created anything.
getitrite, God told Adam and Eve to not eat the forbidden fruit. He does not take away their right to choose right or wrong.
BUT...listen...if Adam & Eve were perfect, they would have chosen not to eat the fruit...Do...you...understand?
The only free-will they had was to do all things perfectly, being that they were PERFECT.
Lord help me!!!
I understand that you have chosen to ignore Stevennix messages to you. If you reread it and combine it with my post, maybe it will shine some light on you. If you still don't recieve the revelation, continue to call on the lord to help you. God bless!
I think we mistake perfect for complete.
Where does it say perfect?
Genesis 6:9 "These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God".
This is the first mention of the word perfect.
Strongs definition of perfect in genesis 6:9
1) complete, whole, entire, sound
a) complete, whole, entire
b) whole, sound, healthful
c) complete, entire (of time)
d) sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity
e) what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact
substituing complete for perfect doesn't justify all such horrific "punishments" either
That "perfect" refers to noah's bloodline,not a person. It was believed that the bloodline was defected.
im just saying what makes getrite keep on about AnE being perfect when perfect is not mentioned about AnE, they were good and good makes mistakes, Noah was perfect.
Getrite keeps sayin that because they were perfect (past tense) they should not have chosen wrongly, BUT AnE were only good as the bible clearly states.
Even Noahs perfect, isn't perfect by definition Noah was just and those definitions do not contain perfect as a definition.
Enoch may have been perfect because he walked with god and was translated but even in enochs case we must read that he was perfect to attribute perfection onto him
Adam and Eve punished themselves by their own disobedience and that is why we all suffer today. It's obvious that you choose to ignore the word sin.
it is not fair to give humans such horrific punishments, whether they believe or not
It seems like she is not the only one who has misunderstood the bible. Are you aware that there are over 30,000 denominations of this insanity? Believers just can't seem to understand what God is trying to tell them.
Which of the 30,000 meanings should she accept to receive her breakthrough?
So there was no imperfections during Neanderthal man's time here on earth, which was hundreds of thousands of years before Adam & Eve.
Correct, because there is no God!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ch … ominations
lol what a lark and a lie about all the different denominations.. sure if you count the catholic church in brazil and the catholic church in nevada and the catholic church in Madagascar as 3 different denoms LOL. This whole page debunks this theory of thousands of different denominations, fact is there is only 23 denominational classifications and some of these are not christLIKEian.
These are all Anglican and there are more anglican.. pic was much bigger before i uploaded it....
THERE SHOULD ONLY BE...ONE
When it comes to the word of God, there should only be one denomonation. There should be, absolutely, no guessing.
If we can't get it right, we miss out on eternal life, or maybe we're going to hell.
what makes you think there should only be one?
Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leads to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Matthew 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
It is simple... now go and do thou likewise..... and in about 2 hrs you will have the answer as to why there are many denominations LOL.
It's not a misunderstanding, WomanofCourage. It's a logical challenge. Sin is disobedience to God. The supposed spiritual separation it causes between the sinner and God is a direct creation of God. As an omniscient and omnipotent creator, he has direct control over what he creates. To say that he created them perfectly (without sin but with free will) is to contradict oneself. Besides, without the knowledge of good and evil how could they truly and clearly perceive the consequences of their actions. "Perfect" under such conditions would mean ignorant, naive and blindly obedient. Is that your definition of perfect?
sounds very logical. I have a huge problem with the contradictions in the bible & the hypocrisy and lack of agreement of its followers
tastybrain, How does it become a direct creation of God? You need to go back and read Genesis. The Lord God commanded the man, saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it. Genesis Ch. 2, 16-17. These scriptures clearly states God gave Adam and Eve knowledge of good and evil. This explains how they could truly and clearly perceive the consequences of their actions.
humans are the cause and effect of these things, not creationalism.
humans in-bred, humans changed the environment, humans injected other humans with vaccines --actual diseases-- altering the natural genetics in them. Humans added chemicals to food and water supplies causing free radicals and malformations.
Do humans still think there is no consequence for their actions? That Creator is just going to "sweep all their oops under the rug"?
Oh wait, they think they can just do whatever and blame the Creator for it or worse, blame someone else?
Come now, after x-thousand years or 3 million (according to evolutionism) humans should have at least learned some measure of responsibility).
The scary part: a single average human emits nearly 250,000 electrostatic (negative) frequencies per day in the form of words. Multiply that by 1 year (91.250 million); multiply that by 7 billion humans on the planet -- that amount of energy can cause 100 earthquakes registering a perfect 10 on the scale. BUT, that is nothing compared to the energy emitted by medical building in downtown LA...
Humans never stop to realize the impact their words have, and even less how much impact their actions have.
Sorry, just ranting I suppose...
http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?/ … ild-birth/
bible says that god created babies, so the sin excuse is crap
that page u refer to is not as good as the bible and allowing God to speak to you.. anyway.
If God forms in the womb its still 9months to birthday. Anything can happen.
"anything can happen" - so god is not involved? that contradicts with bible verses that say god forms people in the womb.
Forming a baby is a process involving a huge cell divisions - a small thing going wrong has a big impact. Happens in other animals too - they get punished for sin too?
he forms and people abuse what happens after the forming is a dubious factor.
where does god stop forming? after conception? Ignorant people believe that only abuse results in birth defects
to form means to flick all the switches and then to let it grow into what it is supposed to ... when i form a painting i sketch the rudiments. When a house builders lays forms down they are not the completed structure.
you need to look at words more closely and get an understanding of what they mean before you superimpose your inference of being correct. I say this for your edification.
//What I am saying is that humanity, when allowed to follow the path of "mother nature" or "evolution" instead of adhering to the original will of God, is weak and imperfect.//
Interesting statement that brings this question to mind. If as you say original sin is partially responsible for birth defects, why do birth defects occur in primitive tribe that have no exposure to christianity? If it is true that a person who has no knowledge of christianity can't be sent to hell, why would these people have to suffer thru birth defects?
Another question that comes to mind after reading your post is that you state that eve was created perfectly as was adam. How is a person created as a perfect representation of you god capable of sin? I was under the impression that eve corrupted adam's perfectness. If adam was created in god's image then god is also capable of sin. That makes your god no better than those preaching his words today, right?
Our friend is contradictory here; who on one hand says Adam and Eve were perfect men/woman, in the image of the Creator; on the other hand says Adam and Eve were sinful and hence responsible for all human sufferings and wrongs.
In fact Christianity is wrong in almost all its dogmas.
What contradiction? Adam and Eve were created perfect, in the Image of God. It was afterwards after they had failed to trust God and disobeyed Him that they became sinful. God did not desire for there to be sickness, deformity or any other suffering. When sin entered into the World it caused cosmic caous which resulted in bacteria and virus that cause these maladies to come into existance. No, I don't believe that people who are born with deformities are to blame. They are victims of the consequences of the fall of humanity.
You say that Christianity is wrong in almost all of its dogmas? First of all when you say Christianity are you talking about Historical (the creation of the various sects, the Romanization political church, etc.) or are you talking about Biblical Christianity (the faith taught by Jesus and his Apostles)? Oh, by the way did you know that the word Christian is used only once in the Bible? I believe it is in the book of Acts. In fact no where in the New Testiment did Jesus or any of the Apostles said, "Let's start a new religion and let's call it Christianity". In the 11th chapter of Romans the Apostle Paul states, "Has God forgotten His people Israel whom He foreknew? God forbid, I myself am a Jew."
Secondly, which dogmas are you talking about? Is it from some Pope or Priest or is it from the Bible? If you say the Bible where in the Bible did you find the dogmas that you think are wrong? What book in the Bible, what chapter, what verse? Did you actually read these wrong dogmas or are you just repeating what others have said?
And thirdly, more Christians have been martyered for their belief in Christ in the last 100 years than in all of the centuries before. If Christianity is not true and you live in a country that says being a Christian is a crime punishable by death why would you risk death by holding onto Christianity?
Intelligent design refers to the fact ? Epic start to excellent holy speech. I wonder why rest of the para was even typed after this.
But every thing that we eat, drink, breath,smoke snort or shoot into our blood veins does affect out offspring for generations to come.
Every ill that mankind is faced with today is a product of our past behaviors.
I have seen tomato plants produce their fruit under the ground after being exposed to toxic chemicals.
That wasn't Gods fault.
It was caused by a ruptured gas pipe that carried ammonia.
If this created adverse effects on the plant life I would imagine that everyone that breathed it were affected in some way.
We have no clue as to the MANY ways in which we have all been exposed to various toxins. Some even added to our foods.
The term "defect" itself implies deviation from design. If evolution is true, then it's just a mutation to be celebrated or perhaps studied ... maybe an opportunity to have the gene pool change to the next big thing ...
But there is an agreement even among the most intellectually dishonest among us, that this is a sad thing and in some ways it "should not be".
The should/and should-not feeling implies some sort of intent. There are things that are right and there are things that are wrong. What those things are, reasonable people can disagree reasonably. But that image is heart breaking. For all of us.
The biblical concept of "sin", BTW is not the "you did something bad so I will punish you" interpretation of current western Christianity.
The Greek word, "Sin" means to "miss the mark" it is not always deliberate, it is any imperfection, and doesn't always have the social morality implied by current interpretation ... so, in this case, if environmental pollutants created the defects would be the "sin".
It's not always punishment, it's often consequence. The cause/effect with moral under/over - tones is a more modern construct.
How is your stupid question proof of intelligent design. Read up on the pollutants MAN has chosen to dump into our only place to live. Bring lots of paper, or limber up those fingers, because the list is extremely long, especially some of the chem names. Now see what med problems can be caused by said chems. Now, bring up a PDR. That is the "Physicians Desk Reference". Here is listed all the drugs we us. every single one. Now look up all the side effects from all those man-made drugs. Once you ingest, or apply anything, ANYTHING, you wash it off, or pass it from the body in two different ways. Both involve the toilet (Loo). I wonder why we all don't have birth defects. Maybe we do. Have you looked around lately?
One might consider that we lived on a sin-cursed planet. Everything from weeds to diseases are in this curse.That should not be considered in the debate of design. (Genesis 1-5)
I'm not following your logic, other than the fact that you called me stupid, I'm not seeing a lot in your argument I disagree with. In fact, most of your post supports my point.
yes, there are lots of toxins in the world, and radiation from naturally occuring substances that can alter DNA eg the sun, radiactive rocks (plus all the chemicals that humans make).
So does god not get the blame for making the sun triggering skin cancer? Radioactive rocks that change DNA?
Scientists understand the mechanisms of disease/inheritance/DNA mutations etc.
Prior to science, people believed that things they didn't understand (rainbows, extreme weather, lightning, disease etc) were from a supernatural cause. Religionists today still believe so.
The bible was written when people had no scientific understanding, and it shows. They saw imperfection in the world and came up with the concept of sin.
God is who came up with the word sin. People did not come up with the concept of sin. You seem to interpret things in your own way, and blow the true meaning out of proportion.
how is it out of proportion? I am merely stating how christian theology is so hard to swallow
I am referring to your last sentence. " They saw imperfection in the world and came up with the concept of sin. It speaks about sin in the bible. God is who inspired the scriptures. There is no way people made up the concept of sin.
your last sentence - you sound so sure of yourself, yet to make such a claim is ridiculous
Yes I am sure. I have confidence in God's word, and his word never fails.
just because you believe something is true, doesn't actually make it true
Truth just IS.
It's not truth because I or any one else believes it.
Our believing it affects us, not the other way round.
This is a very profound statement and the heart of the debate ... there is truth, perception and communication of that perception.
One of the truths is that most people like to think they are right ... it doesn't matter whether or not they are Christians or Atheist. The psychological need to be right is often stronger than the desire to actually know the truth. So, very few people really want to know the truth, they just want to feel like they are right.
We see this in science, where subscribers to a school of thought gets an emotional investment in a theory and disregard contrary data.
We see it in theology, a group gets an emotional investment in a doctrine and they disregard contrary scripture.
To make things more complicated, when we find contrary information, it doesn't necessarily mean that our previous ideas were wrong. It is often simply an opportunity to grow in understanding of a bigger picture.
For example, fluid behavior is substantially different at supersonic speeds. Until jet aircraft were developed, there was no concept of a "sound barrier", let alone any hint that fluids were different beyond that barrier.
The discovery of the sound barrier was an opportunity for us to understand the nature of fluid dynamics in ways that we had not previously imagined.
And we, as humans, decided that the best way to use it was to build machines to break things and kill people more effectively. Which has its own set of truths.
Another example, the French Academy of Physics declared Thomas Edison's phonograph to be a fraud because it did not fit with their current theories of how sound worked. In reality, it was an opportunity to explore wave theory in a whole different way.
Their conclusions were wrong, and yet, most of their fundamental observations were still valid and were the basis upon which wave theory is now understood.
Please provide an example as it is standard in the scientific community to never disregard contrary data, which is the very crux of the scientific method where a hypothesis must have the capacity for falsifiability.
I would agree.
In theology, there can never be contrary information to the word of a god.
Don't worry, you're in no danger of making it back on to my list of people I think are intellectually honest, as the answer to your question was already contained within my previous answer. You are either incapable or unwilling to see it. Your demand for additional documentation is rejected.
As I suspected, there aren't any for you to offer. It was an empty claim from the get go, a fabrication to support a set of irrational beliefs, an intellectually dishonest statement in light of an intelligent argument.
It is not the problem atheists that I have an issue with I would gladly provide said documentation for Baily Bear or even Mark Knowles or Earnest hubs ...
It is you, in particular, that I have very little respect for. It is you, in particular that I have seen reject data that does not fit your theory with an arrogant dismissiveness.
I do not believe that you, in fact, believe what you claim.
You're free to point out where I've dismissed or rejected any data. However, the reason most likely is due to the fact that your claim is empty and you are unable to produce anything to substantiate it.
Sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about.
If I fabricated a whopper of a tale that supported your belief system, would you respect me then?
I see this happening in theology, not science - science always call things "theories" even though so much evidence from wide sources to be accepted as fact. Bible bashers say they have fact and truth with no independent evidence.
Bible bashers are not theologians any more than science reporters in the press are scientists.
The liberal gene fiasco a few days back is a perfect example.
What the scientist actually said was, "Ideology has both genetic and environmental causes" ... and "we have isolated the specific 'ideology' gene".
Said in that way, that's not really news. That's just one aspect of the nature/nurture theory that has been around so long. But taking advantage of the current political upheaval to sell newspapers, rather than calling it a genetic predisposition to ideology, which is more scientifically accurate, they called it "a liberal gene". The press could just as well called it a "conservative" gene.
The problem wasn't the science, it was the reporting of the science and the popular response to that reporting.
I used the term theology rather than religion purposefully ... theology is historical/philosophical discipline and normally does not make scientific pronouncements.
By analogy, religion, in this particular case, is the popular reporting of theology.
There are one or two true scientist types here on hub pages, you, Disappearing Head, a couple of others ... everyone else is more like a science groupy. My field is software engineering with a lot of experience in computer simulation. So, I'm more of a practitioner than a scholar. Still, I have enough background (my degree is in Computer Information Systems with a second major in Chemistry)
Same thing with theology. There are a couple of serious theological students (or in my case hobbyists) everyone else is self taught ... which is fine ... but they clamp down on one aspect of "truth" without the whole picture. It's that amway mentality we talked about before.
I just happen to be fortunate enough to have professional theologians and actual scientists in my circle of close friends, so we can have meaningful discussions.
I know longer work in science, but still find the field fascinating (probably more so, now that stepped back and can read what I want to).
Are any theologists non-believers? Do theologists research the background independently of the bible, or just scrutinise scriptures? I imagine they must be biased, searching for things to try and reinforce their ingrained beliefs? Or are some open-minded?
Even though evolution seems incredible, I have more belief in it because of a huge body of evidence & it makes sense when I examine the science. I'm not getting that out of 95% of religionists or the bible.
The amway mentality explains it well. I find the people that spout "I believe because the bible is true etc" and other regurgitated cliches irritating.
I am skeptical about everything eg I think the global warming by humans is a load of crap, and the "scientists" that startest that fiasco have to lie to get their funding, even if they don't believe in it. Guess same goes from some church ministers.
As a matter of fact there are a great number of theologians who believe that God is a philosophical construct. I don't happen to agree with them, but yes, even some of those I respect greatly see God as either a philosophical construct, or Christianity as a sociological response to a deistic creator. (The basis of deism is the "clock maker theory" God created the laws in which the universe operates, wound it up and stepped back) Within the deistic philosophy, God is more of an impersonal intelligence that included moral and ethical as well as the physical ones.
There are theologians who are primarily philosophers, and compare the writings of Paul and Socrates. There are theologians who are archeologists ... some dig to prove, others to disprove ... some objectively ... some not so much ... some historians.
Some study the bible as literature.
I happen to love the pentacostal type people that I know, but for the most part, many professional theologians write them off as unwilling to study scripture with a scholarly integrity.
I take it one case at a time.
There's something to the mutation and adaptation observation, but there's something "missing". Looking at it strictly scientifically, the theory is too broad. I think it should be broken down into "island theories" that are more provable and see how they grow together.
Oddly, I don't believe in "young earth" because I think it disagrees with original scripture ... and I don't believe in "old earth" because I've seen too many inconsistencies. Basically that means both my conservative religious friends and my science buddies all disagree with me. Which is odd because my only point is ... I really don't know, but I don't think they do either ... LOL ...
That used to bother me, but I realized that that's just how some people are. And I believe the bible, but not as a scientific document. One of my friends who lived with me for a while was a historian and linguistic scholar. He used to say to me all the time:
"The bible was not written in English to modern Americans." And he would proceed to explain the language and the history, which is FAR more complex than the "because I said so" attitude.
Still, some of these people were there for me at the darkest time in my life. I will not minimize them or their faith just because they don't or can't understand.
The difference is your skepticism is borne of a real desire to know the truth, and that appears to be your primary agenda. That's not the same thing as a mocking disbelief ... you explore, you ask, you analyze. You write people off for the amway attitude but not for believing something different. You've got an objective eye for right and wrong.
I respect the hell out of that. And I believe, that in some ways, that puts you closer to finding God than people who claim that they know it all because they can quote bible verses and get other people to quote them too.
There's an old saying, "Even the devil quotes scripture when it suits his purpose."
had to post here, as other thread run out. Appreciate the comment about how you see my skeptism as different - I've been finding it frustrating getting useless accusations from some (that fail to offer anything of substance - sigh). Yes, those people annoy me immensely. You're obviously very perceptive, unlike 90% of people on here
Baileybear, You are right. This is why I don't make up things and call it the truth. God's word is truth whether anyone believe it or not. His words have never failed and will not come back void.
This isn't even an argument. Men have come up with far more interesting, complex and contrived concepts than sin. LOL!
Women o. c…The continued use of bible scripture is a “lame reference” to bolster arguments about religious matters or anything else…Is there enough courage within to realize that bible has no credibility, nothing but fabrications and lies gathered and bound by illiterate people?
What is the problem here, are we deft?
Why shouldn't Woman of Courage use Bible scripture to talk about religious matters? Your point is not logical. Have you ever read the Bible? What fabrication and lies are you refering to? What book in the Bible, what chapter and what verse; or are you just repeating what you have heard?
For centuries even up to the present day in many countries it is a criminal offense punishable by death to read the Bible. People have tried to destroy it yet it survives. Malcom Muggery and C.S. Lewis were once Atheists who tried to dispprove the Bible and they decided to become Christians. Could the Bible survive that long if it was a bunch of lies and fabrications gathered by illiterate people? I doubt it besides illiterate people can't read or write!
In my world everything is a test. If i get cancer God can cure it or he will take me home, either way Its all good.
In the meantime what about ezekiel. He had to flee from jezebel, she was killing the prophets of God. Does God get the blame for that? God told eze to get to the brook cheron and god will feed thee there with food the ravens bring. Does God get the blame for lack of a comfy couch.. and whats with the raven food... Do i have to draw water from the stream myself.. Does God get the blame?
This line of thinking is terrible.. bad.. and only shows your intense need for a way to shift blame from whatever onto God and on that day you will shout a huge hurray! I sense a holy spirit in da house!
you judge my thinking as bad. Bad because I ask the hard questions that blind believers can't answer?
how many christians that have cancer seek medical treatment? Sounds like they really aren't really keen being "taken home."
But how many do you know that haven't? I think you make an inference here. Canadian religion is different than american religion and african is different again.. people in china get killed for mentioning jesus is their lord, yet should we diss them for seeking medical treatment, if indeed they do. Are you talking about christiLIKEians or just sunday church goers. Some people have huge faith in God and others pray when something goes wrong.
The only important question is not what OTHERS do, but what do YOU do.
If one day you are christian and you develop cancer then ask yourself this question, until then it is an unfair question.
just my observation that christians will have more faith in doctors than a supernatural being eg for surgery, IVF,
There have been plenty of children die because religious folk refused to get medical help for their children
This does not apply to me. I believe in going to the doctor for medical help, and put my faith in God to work through the doctor's hands.
you're still inferring. A) that they are mighty people of faith, with unshakable faith even in the eyes of sickness. B) (and maybe i infer here, but) That many who refuse bloodtransfusions have died ... I forget what denom that is.
I have an alternate story you might like to add to your library. A brother sick of a strange intestinal breakdown, prayed as to what he should do, go to the doctor and have the surgery or leave it to God to heal.
God said have the surgery
and the brother brought a young man to jesus while in hospital. A man who otherwise could not have reached i suppose, or this man was approachable being in distress.
The more fingers that point at God are 3xs the number pointing back at all times. Oh yah, the brother was fine, surgery went superwell and the saved person i believe he said attended the same church as he.
DD, I didn't take this to be a serious question, did you?
who are you saying has a stupid question? The OP? I don't think birth defects are support of intelligent design at all
no they are not. In the beginning everything was created "very good". I am sure if there were few abnormalities, if any... over the years and indeed millennium, i would think that Gods creation, being dominioned over by man, that many things are far from the initial intelligent design.
This is the way things go when sin enters the picture.
But if you look at the very good specimens there is intelligent design still.
If the Bible is to be believed, God isn't a very intelligent designer. That's probably why he gets REALLY mad a lot and kills everybody whenever he realizes he screwed up.
So if the Bible is correct, then God is not intelligent. But if God is intelligent, then the Bible is not correct. Yet another crippling self-contradiction inherent in Christianity.
I'm researching a hub about unintelligent design
Not a good designer... theres a sun up there what shines warmth and stuff and never has to be refulled.. We are on a beautiful planet, 100% recycles itself and grows food for us. There is beauty to behold beyond belief on earth and in the universe. The colors God used are psychologically perfect! Could you imagine red grass or an aluminum sky, with yellow trees and purple dirt... the colors are calming and serene, restful INTENTIONALLY.
God did not screw everything up. Man did. Lets say you have an ant farm and the ants aren`t happy and are fighting and making a mess of the nice ant farm you wanted to have. So you set them free. If you don`t set them free then you become a warden, constantly breaking up the fights and Lording over them waving a big stick. in essence a jailer. Your ants are not happy warring all the time but in the wild perhaps a larger domain you can instruct them how to get to that peaceful state you wanted them to be in the first place.
How do you equate unintelligence and the bible together? I ruin supposedly crippling contradictions about the bible all the time. You are going to have to explain this to me otherwise your post is just vain fluff.
actually in Australia, there is a lot of red dirt; many trees are yellow (especially in autumn), and a keen observer will notice that mountains seem more blue/purple with distance (plus sunsets often have purple).
there's too many contradictions to list. Here's a compiled list - take your pick
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ … ncies.html
"IF" there is no higher power that some people call God?
What then would have caused all of these birth defects?
What then causes all of the suffering in the world?
If there is no god? who's fault is it that there are children starving to death in this world?
Your answer to these questions is the correct!
The answer to these questions does not prove one way or the other the existence of a God.
It does however Make many peoples concepts of who or what that God is,said or does hard or impossible to believe.
So I think that it is only concepts that we are really debating.
I think secularists post sums it up well - in essense
either take the bible literally and conclude god is not intelligent;
or if god is intelligent, the bible cannot be taken literally
or god doesn't exist at all
The only thing that I would add to your comment is that we gotta keep our interpretations out of it also.
Then I would agree.
how can one keep their interpretions out of it? eg the adam & eve thread - some christians say it is definitely literal; others say metaphor
I guess here lies a problem.
How to define what interpretation is?
Is the definition like saying.. This is the way that I understand it?
Or is the definition of interpret .. This is the way that I understand it IF I CHANGE this or that?
I don't think it is correct to follow the second definition.
There are OFTEN different ways of understanding a statement without obliterating the original statement.
We can ALWAYS change the intended message by just changing the wording just a little.
To define Misinterpret is much easier! To impose a meaning that is not implied and/or negates that that is implied.
I'm playing Webster on that one. Call my definition an interpretation if you wish.
either take the bible literally and conclude god is not intelligent;
or if god is intelligent, the bible cannot be taken literally
or god doesn't exist at all
LOL thats the best you can do.... ignore all of what i say.
you are just searching for answers that back you up and are not open to learning or understanding.
Birth defects are caused by many a reason, none of which has anything to do with a intelligent design or a gods doing.
The acne medication Acutane . Before they caught it. Young woman taking it that got pregnant had extremely deformed children . They were termed flipper baby's. it was awful.
Yes but is easier for some people to blame God
Listening to drug commercials and they tell ya all the things that they can sometimes cause often sounds worse than the ailment that they are supposed to alleviate (not cure) makes me wonder why they bother.
Even if only 1% of the people taking the drug has these side effects ... When a million people take the drugs there WILL be a lot of people with those conditions. Put them in the Super Dome and there will be standing room only.
And no one remembers how it happened???
It appears that God is not responsible for ANYTHING, but He, somehow, gets full credit for being all- powerful, omniscient, and for creating everything, including reality.
If God created this reality, how could He not be responsible for the mistakes His creations make? God had a choice. He chose to make man disobedient, but still gave man free-well.
Is this madness or what?
Kinda like the CEO of Ford motor Co.
AND Henry Ford is resposible for every Drunk Driver fatality.
Could you please explain the analogy you have presented?
I fail to see the comparison. Thanks.
You say that if a God created man that he is responsible for everything that his creation does.
Henry Ford created the Ford Motor company. And Ford Motor co. makes the cars. By your logic; That would make him responsible for everything that we do with his creations.
If a drunk driver is in a fatal crash driving a Ford, it is then Henry's fault.
The CEO gets credit for the success of the company and his salary is enormous and he gets a bonus when doing well.
When the co. does poorly. it isn't his fault, it is someone else's' fault such as the economy.
By your logic.
No I did not say that God created man, I said God created REALITY. Do you, now, understand?
No, this is your logic, dictated by your faulty comprehension of my statement.
What?!!! How does this compare to God creating REALITY?
What?!!! How does this compare to God creating REALITY?
No, by your logic. You should try to actually understand what I'm proposing, instead of blindly defending nonsense.
getrite: are you responsible for your childrens actions once they pass the age of 30? If not then how is god responsible for what actions mankind takes
NONSENSE. How can you compare me to God? I did not create my children, unless you consider the act of sex to be creation.
And if you do consider a human being having sex the same as an omnipotent, omniscient, ubiquitous deity creating a human being, I think your thinking is very narrow and child-like.
You contradict your God in many of your posts.
You need to write a book titled Hundred and One ways to avoid answering a question.
Never mind I'll do it. All I gotta do is run through a couple hundred of your posts; that oughta be enough.
Why don't ya answer the mans question??
Your view of reality is so narrow, that you seem to not even know when a question has been answered.
Good luck with that book. I hope you know how foolish you are going to look writing a book based on your denial of reality.
In other words, his question was thoroughly answered.
Therefore your reply is ABJECT nonsense.
LOL getrite the bullying act has no effect on me. I have not contradicted myself at all. I am able to give a bunch of different viewpoints concerning topics and if you think i have contradicted myself, prove it dont just beak off about something you may well have misconstrued.
I do not compare you to God be sure of that. lol. I am drawing a comparison. If you want to be mad at god for creating you, which he didnt. he only allowed the two seeds from the parents to form you in the womb, the rest of the shaping you did yourself. You created you, nobody else, God will reshape you if you let him.. but thats a different story.
I was responding to this post
``If God created this reality, how could He not be responsible for the mistakes His creations make? God had a choice. He chose to make man disobedient, but still gave man free-well.
Is this madness or what?``
I don``t know what church ``formed`` you but you had better believe they were way to leagalistic.. now to blame god for mans action is not going to help when the question is asked by God, ``what have you done with my son``. the answer above will not hold water.
I will infer here, that you are still thinking the sin was choosing a piece of fruit. But it wasn`t you see, God asked àdam where are you`` representing that God was spending more and more time away from AnE because they were sinning more and more. You may not have read my posts about, mankind not being in a punished situation (God made a simple way to get to him called salvation) and that we are in a positional situation.. AnE had babies who had babies, who had babies, outside of the garden (which was Gods first choice for them) who had babies, etc, etc,, who had you, outside of the garden.
Now put away your anger and give us your happy face!
That is good! Just because you know who your uncle is ;
Ya don't have to know what kind of car he drives or how many nickels he has in his pocket.
But if your uncle is going to give them away you can hope he has enough to go around.
that is right study on it
I gotta go get some work done ... Daylight is burning.
This is not an analogy from wisdom, but, instead, a narrow view of the attributes attibuted to your God. You have no idea what omnipotent, omniscient, or ubiquitous really means.
In other words, this is NOT deep thinking, but is rather shallow, and elementary.
say if there is a god and it creates a glass for you to drink from. and then you go running with the glass and break it. just because said god made the glass doesn't imply any type of warranty for misuse of that glass. you broke the glass not a god
Check this fact.
Universe > Galaxies >Galaxy (Milky way) > Our Solar system > Earth.
So entity which created this universe came down all the way from this huge universe to earth to make a virgin pregnant just to send his son to guide humanity ?
What this intelligent entity is smoking ?
Gen 1:1 ``in the begining God created the heaven and the earth``
Safe to assume this heaven is not where God lives, that would have already been created. This heaven seems connected with the earth... so this narrows your view to this:
Our Solar System......Earth. I may throw in milky way but i do not feel prompted to.
This entity put man on earth in a garden to have them live happily everafter.
I really don`t feel like enlightening you on the whole bible.
Our terms of size may be totally irrelevant in the spiritual realm. True spirit beings may even be able to adjust their size, i do not know i am specualting here. But read my hub on ``universal size, red herring 2` it might show you that size has nothing to do with our worthiness.
And as for the rest of the universe, How do we know that isn``t a work of God from ages ago. The genesis account can be reconciled to only applying to our earth and our heaven. The rest is gods canvass all through the ages and he does marvellous works.
lol have to... what are you smokin
By biblical logic, if all knowing, almighty created a life as per his will then whatever actions that life performs fall withing the probability that almight already figured out. It's same like puppet. So no matter what action that life takes for survival is fault of almighty. Almighty can anytime correct his action just to modify that life. If bible can claim so then we can go ahead and easily blame almight as well.
You make sense. Unlike some others on here that are delusional enough to think that nonsense makes sense.
By biblical logic, if all knowing, almighty created a life as per his will then whatever actions that life performs fall withing the probability that almighty already figured out.
( talking about Gods B plan here)
It's same like puppet.
(No puppet do not have free will to choose)
So no matter what action that life takes for survival is fault of almighty.
(wrong and if you rob a store and the police put your parents into jail or your parents can be heard to say, where did we go wrong.... we both know this not true. The parents did not go wrong, the child did.)
Almighty can anytime correct his action just to modify that life.
(he can but then a) whats the point of having the creation if you are just going to turn them into puppets. b) where is Love. Living beings just zapped into obedience do not love, indeed we have examples of that today.. oh my life is going well i have all i need, why drag god into it. In order to enjoy this life on this planet we need our flesh, touch, taste, smell, and there will always be temptations to do wrong, unless god makes us puppets.. you play with a puppet and see how long it amuses you.)
If bible can claim so then we can go ahead and easily blame almighty as well.
(nope, ya can`t and the bible doesn`t claim so.)
Wow. Forum got off subject,hunh? They have never found the information that tells cells when to seperate. cells make up everything, yet they cannot find it's source of direction. There has to be some information or authority that tells cells when its time to seperate. Is God behind every cell division or are we missing something in the way of biology?
No. Some people are not reading biology books to begin with... before making claim from emotional bias.
Biologists (who do read biology books) haven't found what determines cells to seperate.
Sane biologist don't make conclusion with "Who" separates the cells after reading about evolution.
Don't bring theology into it. It is an unanswered question.That's all. I tried to phrase it with neutrality.
I didn't. You did. Check your reply for emotional bias for "god". Obviously you have no idea about "evolution" to even understand speciation.
skyfire. Would you like to see the proof of, not just God, but how time travel works?
In reply to the forum: Since when is dumping toxins into your rivers, onto your land, and into your air proof of intelligent design. Don't look at God. We did it. If intelligent design is somehow proof of something like, maybe existing. Then we do not exist anymore than God does. Trouble is, I'm looking right at him. Looks smart to me. I know this, that when everyone gets the joke, you will soon determine that ....Moses couldn't have thought any of this up.
I don't mind reading creationism BS sometimes. So bring it on.
it's not off-topic - things going wrong with cell-divisions results in birth defects. so does god do it then?
Birth defects if you look at them as intelligently designed consider a better way to look at intelligent defects as a design.
Look at them from another place; how about that there is life of all forms.
All forms get a chance to live this life some short term some long term but all forms get an opportunity.
The part of us that gets our attention is that the formation of a human that doesn't seem to have the same forms as others.
Their are those who don't get to experience life when we think they deserve it; but there are a constant 6 billion human beings on the planet.
If we look at other life forms we can see that we are the least amount that share this planet.
Birth defects help teach us lessons.
If we went around in the world and everything was perfect, then would we grow and learn? There has to be a problem for us to work on. Much like diseases, birth defects give us the opportunity to explore and understand more. Whether it be through outer exploration of someone else, or inner reflection into oneself.
Yep the Einstein clone ignored your stated example in your post once again!
"reject data that does not fit your theory with an arrogant dismissiveness. "
How true that is,,,,
So, what you're saying is that because he made the claim, it must be true. LOL!
Perhaps, you folks are referring to this:
"One time a skeptical minister was said to have visited
Edison's laboratory, supposing the phonograph was a fraud based on ventriloquism. He was invited to record himself reciting Scripture on a sheet of tinfoil Edison had prepared beforehand, with the following result:
He that cometh from above is above all ("Who are you?"); he
that is of the earth ("Oh, you can't preach!") is earthly and
speaketh of the ("I think you're a fraud!") earth; he that cometh from heaven is above all. And what he has seen and heard
("Louder, old pudding head!") that he testifieth; and no man
receiveth his testimony ("Oh, go and see Beecher!"). (Scientific
This arrangement was nicely ambiguous: was Edison disparaging
the minister, or was the phonograph itself doing so?"
https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bits … sequence=1
Since humans are Not perfect, things sometimes go wrong in the development of some people, but they are no less human than you and I are. If you have a bread pan with a big dent in it, do you think you will get anything but a loaf of bread formed with the dent in it also? Since we are not perfect, things happen when cells form, sometimes, but did God cause it? No! Funny how we are quick to Blame God for things that go wrong yet very Slow to credit Him for things that do go right. How ungrateful we humans are.
I actually see that believers here doing the opposite - god gets all the credit and abolutely no blame. Humans get the blame 100%.
yep... because we see things as they truly are. We see god working to correct mans mistakes, which i believe are uncorrectable unless God comes down and shows himself. Then we can all live in puppet land as god slaps our hands every time we want to sin. And we will sin because really, doesnt that `keep off the grass` sign just make ya wanna walk on it. Doesnt that hot married woman still make your blood boil or that hot husband who does everything right and makes a pile of money, oooh to get him alone .... or getting a 10,000 cheque donated to the company of which you are chief treasurer look tempting just for an extra 1,000, SLAP! welcome to Gods world... now do it right!!!! put all the money in the account! welcome to puppet land, after 1,000 years of that God just might be thinking, ì should just kll all the sinners who wont learn and stick with the rest`. lol.
there is no hellish torment forever and ever because God is dispensing the way he does things now with us and because our eyes have not seen he does not glee in torture. God understands what is like to be human in jesus christ. I have spiritually seen God, not physically but christians know when the father has moved by his power. We are not without proof because we first believed in Him.
Matthew 13:16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have NOT seen, and yet have believed.
i can`t blame god for anything but i do give him credit for both the good and the bad. Fathom that.
by kirstenblog 4 years ago
Darwin acknowledged from the start that the eye would be a difficult case for his new theory to explain. Difficult, but not impossible. Scientists have come up with scenarios through which the first eye-like structure, a light-sensitive pigmented spot on the skin, could have gone through changes...
by skyfire 11 years ago
I found ken millers talk on ID a worth to watch. You can watch the video : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSgwhat are your views on intelligent design ?
by Jesse James 10 years ago
This is another religious topic, but unlike most that are posted. The basis of this thread is to gather the thoughts of atheists, evolutions or scientologists and christians can even chime in. Most evolutionists believe that the world wasn't created by a God, but rather formed through many...
by janesix 8 years ago
It just means evolution was designed by god
by marinealways24 11 years ago
Is Evolution an Intelligent or Ignorant Design?
by Andrew Petrou 4 years ago
Does astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson now favour "intelligent design"?Has noted (former?) atheist astrophysicist Degrasse Tyson now joined the growing ranks of atheist scientists who are hedging their bets that the universe is a kind of "simulation" created by a superior...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|