Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
By chance I'm not saying its out of his powers... But rather a minor thing and already has a rule to it... such as "If a baby was born tommorrow... Which sex will it be???" God would leave it to chance...Not God Creates a blank universe with no rules and lets it roll....
You can find out what sex it can be by what you eat.....certain chromosomes are attracted to certain proteins..that's all....If you want a boy eat more beef, if you want a girl don't. Studies have been done on it.
And don't know no one come back with "zzzzzzzzzz" either..
ok let me just say that if God didnt exist then whats the point of anything? Without God there would be know reason, and reason is God, therefor God exists(I think I heard that somewhere). anyway my point is that if God did not exist then life would be pointless, order would be pointless, everything would be pointless. I could go out and kill someone and think nothing of it because life doesnt matter, we are just created from evolution. The thing is that isnt true. God does exist because there is a reason in the world, thats why the world hasnt already destroyed itself.
*sign*.... I know that... But there was a point in the example..
God creates boundaries and lets chance dictate the outcome... so if he created a bag with only blue or red beads in it.. God lets lady luck pic out your bead... The rules have already told us its gonner be blue or red....
Unless studies have shown that if you eat more fish you get a blue bead..🙄
Originally posted by =Mysta=-kILL
ok let me just say that if God didnt exist then whats the point of anything? Without God there would be know reason, and reason is God, therefor God exists(I think I heard that somewhere). anyway my point is that if God did not exist then life would be pointless, order would be pointless, everything would be pointless. I could go out and kill someone and think nothing of it because life doesnt matter, we are just created from evolution. The thing is that isnt true. God does exist because there is a reason in the world, thats why the world hasnt already destroyed itself.
Why would there be no point if there was no god? There is still cause and effect. The world would work just fine without a god. The fact that there is or is not a god has nothing to do with rather you will kill someone. People get murdered all the time in this world. I think if there was a god, like the one in the bible, people would not be aloud to kill each other.
Originally posted by =Mysta=-kILL
Without God there would be know reason, and reason is God, therefor God exists(I think I heard that somewhere). anyway my point is that if God did not exist then life would be pointless
Animals live out there lives without praying... Do they go to hell???
No they naturaly survive so that they can live.... If they kill, they don't seem to broken up about it.... and no, animals don't just kill for food!
Without proof your theory holds little credability... While I myself believe that there is a god for kinda the same reason.... I don't think of it as proof... Just my natural instinct to want to live, as I know I'm going to die one day, its just a longing not to sink into a black oblivion (sorry god)
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why would there be no point if there was no god? There is still cause and effect. The world would work just fine without a god. The fact that there is or is not a god has nothing to do with rather you will kill someone. People get murdered all the time in this world. I think if there was a god, like the one in the bible, people would not be aloud to kill each other.
Back on topic:
"Did dinos soar? Imaginations certainly took flight over "Archaeoraptor Liaoningesis", a birdlike fossil with a meat-eater's tail that was spirited out of northeastern China, 'discovered' at a Tucson, Arizona, gem and mineral show in '99, and displayed at the National Geographic Society in Washington, D.C. Some 110,000 visitors saw the exhibit, which closed January 17th; millions more read about the find in November's National Geographic. Now, paleontologists are eating crow. Instead of 'a true missing link' connecting dinosaurs to birds, the specimen appears to be a composite, its unnusual appendage likely tacked on by a Chinese farmer, not evolution.
"Archaeoraptor is hardly the first 'missing link' to snap under scrutiny. In 1912, fossil remains of an ancient hominid were found in England's Piltdown quarries and quickly dubbed man's ape-like ancestor. It took decades to reveal the hoax."
-U.S. News & World Report, February 14,2000
"Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record."
-Time magazine, Nov. 7,1977
"Charles Dawson, a British lawyer and amateur geologist, announced in 1912 his discovery of pieces of a human skull, and an apelike jaw in a gravel pit near the town of Piltdown, England...Dawson's announcement stopped the scorn cold. Experts instantly declared Piltdown Man (estimated to be 300,000 to one million years old) the evolutionary find of the century. Darwin's missing link had been found.
"Or so it seemed for the next 40 or so years. Then, in the early fifties...scientists began to suspect misattribution. In 1953, that suspcicion gave way to a full-blown scandal: Piltdown Man was a hoax. Radiocarbon tests proved that its skull belonged to a 600-year old woman, and its jaw to a 500-year old orangutan from the West Indies."
-Our Times: The Illustrated History of the 20th Century
These are not isolated incedents.
The famed Nebraska Man was derived from a single tooth, which was later found to be from an extinct pig. Java Man, found in the early 20th century, was nothing more than a piece of skull, a fragment of a thigh bone, and three molar teeth. The rest came from the deeply fertile imaginations of plaster of Paris workers. Java Man is now regarded as fully human. Heidelberg Man came from a jawbone, a large chin section, and a few teeth. Most scientists reject the jawbone because its similar to modern man. Still, many evolutionists believe that he's 250,000 years old. No doubt they pinpointed his birthday with carbon dating. However, TIME magazine (June 11, 1990) published a science article subtitled "Geologists show that carbon dating can be way off", in which it is implied that carbon dating is only 100% accurate up to 7,000-10,000 years(the exact amount of time that the earth would be around if the Bible is correct), and even more interestingly, :
"Shells from LIVING snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old" - SCIENCE magazine, vol.224, 1984 (emphasis added 😉 )
The Neanderthal man is no evidence for evolution either. He died of exposure. His skull was exposed as being fully human, not ape. Not only was his stuped posture found to be caused by disease, but he spoke and was artistic and religious.
😎
If you actualy looked up the creators of those hoaxes you would find out why evolutionist still strive... Those people didn't create the evidence to prove evolution as no evidence exists.. They created it cause they wanted the fame and fortune that came with finding the missing link!
also carbon dating isn't the only form of Radiometric dating... Other tech can date far greater ranges depending on the half-life of the radiation source used...
I.e Carbon 14 has a HL of 5730 years...
But Potassium-argon dating has a HL 1.3x109 years....
Optically stimulated luminescence dating which they can measure soil samples with can measure upto 200,000 years...
Originally posted by =Mysta=-kILL
God gave people free will, but also rules. People that kill others are not obeying the rules and, if they do not repent, will go to hell.
Well, when you think of killing someone, thats assuming that you have, dont you get this feeling like it would be wrong, against your rights or something? You dont just kill people because you know it would be wrong to do so.
Man made rules.
Originally posted by =Mysta=-kILL
written by God and given to Moses.
The same Moses who threw a hissy fit because after invading a city, his people didn't butcher all of the children. So he sent them back to the city to do that. And then he told everyone, "Though shalt not kill."
I used to try to explain evolution to Creationists until I came to a realization; Creationists don't want to understand evolution; they just want to whine about it. Talk about a time-saver! Still, if anyone cares, the carbon dating of the snail shells is quite correct; you do know how snail shells form, right? Here's a hint; it involves carbon from the water. Carbon that does not magically become younger when it becomes part of a snail shell. It took maybe ten seconds for me to find this out, and that's how I know that creationists aren't interested in learning about evolution; if they were, they'd research their claims before spouting them at people.
Hmmm. Yes. And the Ten Commandments weren't so revolutionary, various civilisations that predated Moses had laws - though shall not kill, though shall not steal etc. Not new. Not unique. In fact the only real unique one on the list was the "no worshipping others" one.
The Neanderthal man is no evidence for evolution either. He died of exposure. His skull was exposed as being fully human, not ape. Not only was his stuped posture found to be caused by disease, but he spoke and was artistic and religious.
Crimney!!! What tosh. What unbelievable tosh. For one, the Neanderthal was neither ape nor homo sapian. Stupid posture? Not stupid, simply his skeletal structure. Artistic, religious and spoke? One of the reasons anthropologists and the like believe Neanderthal failed where the homo line flourished was the fact the skull/jaw structure wasn't suited for complex language - the ability to speak is very important in terms of human dominance when it was at that point. That, and it was never exposed as a fake.
Originally posted by Gregory
The same Moses who threw a hissy fit because after invading a city, his people didn't butcher all of the children. So he sent them back to the city to do that. And then he told everyone, "Though shalt not kill."I used to try to explain evolution to Creationists until I came to a realization; Creationists don't want to understand evolution; they just want to whine about it. Talk about a time-saver! Still, if anyone cares, the carbon dating of the snail shells is quite correct; you do know how snail shells form, right? Here's a hint; it involves carbon from the water. Carbon that does not magically become younger when it becomes part of a snail shell. It took maybe ten seconds for me to find this out, and that's how I know that creationists aren't interested in learning about evolution; if they were, they'd research their claims before spouting them at people.
Also a bit of clarification, in science, there are no facts.
In case you missed it, I'll say it again.
THERE. ARE. NO. FACTS.
There are only theroys.
The THEROY of gravity. Does this mean that there is no gravity and is some flimsy sham to try to discredit christianity?
Try it for your self. Pick up the nearest object. It can be anything. Drop it.
Does it fall to the ground?
Yes? Thought so.
Now repeated 1000 times.
Can you expect that the 1001th time it will fall to the ground like all other times?
BOOM! You just proved the "theroy" of Gravity.
But people don't like the idea that there are no cold hard facts in science! They'd rather believe something that is utterly preposterous and without ANY evidence!
And Hit or Miss, your whole reason = God exists reasoning is beyond ridiculous. Morals and such existed FAR longer than Christianity - or any religion for that matter. They did not come from religion. Rather, man made them themselves and religion stole them. Christianity in particular is known for stealing things from other cultures and religions and claiming it as their own.
Originally posted by Lana
And Hit or Miss, your whole reason = God exists reasoning is beyond ridiculous. Morals and such existed FAR longer than Christianity - or any religion for that matter. They did not come from religion. Rather, man made them themselves and religion stole them. Christianity in particular is known for stealing things from other cultures and religions and claiming it as their own.
I'm not going to disagree but I will elaborate, I was brought up in a strong christian family and went to all religious schools. I never really had much of a choice in my faith and as so, I only really know about 1 well... (Shame really) I wouldn't concider myself to be a strong christian anymore, But I do believe there to be a god. Which God is the correct one??? Who has the best religion? to me the base concepts in mainly are the same (try not to kill, Be a good person....) so I don't think It's really worth changing my religion. If science could prove tomorrow that there was no god (of any kind) and the universe is just 1 science theory away from being explained I would try to accept it over disproving it.
For me it feels natural, While I don't expect others to believe on that basis, Its nice to have some faith...