View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 22nd, 2014, 4:12 am



Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Christian vs Science debate tonight 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9490
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
BillySims wrote:
In the beginning, GOD created the Heavens and the Earth.

PERIOD


Interesting, since we now know that Earth is relatively young from a celestial standpoint (less than 5B years) I can infer from your statement that he didn't create much of the rest of the universe (around 14B years) that predates our little planet.

I mean, if God really created man in his own image and really we are basically the main reason he created everything (and I'm assuming we are the only creatures in heaven) - yet the "beginning" only happened after two-thirds of know time had already occurred.

Perhaps we can do a rewrite...

In the beginning, GOD created the start of the universe. After a 10 billion year nap, he created the Heavens and the Earth.

Speaking of PERIOD. Can we lay to rest the Earth also isn't flat, doesn't rest on pillars or build on a foundation, doesn't move or that the sun hurries back to where it rises. Thanks to science, we now know all these statements in the bible are false - PERIOD!

Let's reinterpret the "word" of God once again. Let's stretch a "day" into a catch all "trillion" years, much older than the universe itself.

People always say they use faith to "fill in" all the things we can't explain. But the truth is, the more we can explain things, the more we have to fiddle with the definitions of basic words like "day" to make the Bible still apply. The more we know, the more vague the Bible is forced to become. There is a really simple explanation for all of that, but I'll leave it up to y'all.

TruckinMack wrote:
Nye went into the debate with the jury rigged.


Who needs facts when you can just believe!!! In fact, without using facts you can just use your heart to the most absurd statement and call it the "truth". But let's explore your statement, just a little because I don't have much time.

I'm sure debate was held at the Massachusetts Institute for Evolution since it was "jury rigged", oh wait - it was actually held at the Creation Museum in Kentucky (a top 10 state in terms of belief) founded by Ham himself. Ham wanted this event to give his silly theories some Pub, on his own home turf, in front of a "rigged" crowd to use your own term (the event seated 900 and was sold out in just minutes, I'll let you figure out what almost all of ticket holders believed), against a non-scientist. Nye just wanted to jump start his own entertainment career again after bowing out early on dancing with the stars.

If I ever go on trial for something, I'm hiring TM to "rig the jury" for the other side! :lol:

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


February 5th, 2014, 4:11 pm
Profile WWW
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3039
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
So instead of all of this name bashing and everything, were you entertained? Was it informational and are you glad you took a listen? Did you learn anything from EITHER side? Was it worth spending the time on?

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


February 5th, 2014, 4:29 pm
Profile
Lionbacker Rehab Guru
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2006, 9:08 pm
Posts: 1203
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
Pablo wrote:
TruckinMack wrote:
Nye went into the debate with the jury rigged.


Who needs facts when you can just believe!!! In fact, without using facts you can just use your heart to the most absurd statement and call it the "truth". But let's explore your statement, just a little because I don't have much time.
Please, I expect such parsing from BS. I was not referring to the on site debate reviewers. I was referring to the general public at large. There are probably fewer believers in 'Young Earth' than there are in Atheism. Nye wasn't debating whether God exists, but whether the earth is thousands or millions of years old. Nye had on his side the Atheists, most Christians, Jews, and probably all Muslims, Buddhists and Hindu's. Besides Young Earth Christians, Ham might have had a few native American Indians. The deck was stacked against Ham; the jury rigged.


Pablo wrote:
If I ever go on trial for something, I'm hiring TM to "rig the jury" for the other side! :lol:
It would be my pleasure.

_________________
Climate Change - happening every second, of every minute of every day ever since the world was created. Needless to say it's man's fault.


February 5th, 2014, 4:52 pm
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3819
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
Quote:
Speaking of PERIOD. Can we lay to rest the Earth also isn't flat, doesn't rest on pillars or build on a foundation, doesn't move or that the sun hurries back to where it rises. Thanks to science, we now know all these statements in the bible are false - PERIOD!


Common Pablo! EVERYONE knows the world is on the back of a giant Turtle floating through space! Everything else is just nonsense!


#Discworld (very few of you will get this joke i realise...but UK better!)

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


February 5th, 2014, 5:01 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9490
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
TruckinMack wrote:
Pablo wrote:
TruckinMack wrote:
Nye went into the debate with the jury rigged.


Who needs facts when you can just believe!!! In fact, without using facts you can just use your heart to the most absurd statement and call it the "truth". But let's explore your statement, just a little because I don't have much time.
Please, I expect such parsing from BS. I was not referring to the on site debate reviewers. I was referring to the general public at large. There are probably fewer believers in 'Young Earth' than there are in Atheism. Nye wasn't debating whether God exists, but whether the earth is thousands or millions of years old. Nye had on his side the Atheists, most Christians, Jews, and probably all Muslims, Buddhists and Hindu's. Besides Young Earth Christians, Ham might have had a few native American Indians. The deck was stacked against Ham; the jury rigged.

Pablo wrote:
If I ever go on trial for something, I'm hiring TM to "rig the jury" for the other side! :lol:


It would be my pleasure.


Awesome, I hope I never need to call on you but I'm glad the offer stands. As for the "jury rigged", I didn't take that statement as being the "general public" so lets just chalk that up to a miscommunication.

WarEr4Christ wrote:
So instead of all of this name bashing and everything, were you entertained? Was it informational and are you glad you took a listen? Did you learn anything from EITHER side? Was it worth spending the time on?


I hope to listen to a bit in the next few days, but I'm not about to make a 2+ hour investment in a debate like this unless it is experts in the field and in this case that hardly qualifies. Actually, you framed it as "entertainment" above, and that is more along the lines of how I would listen. But honestly, this isn't near the top of my entertainment cue right now so I'm not likely to give it much time. Based on a couple of quick articles I've read, and the background of each participant, I don't think it is worth too much of your time WE4C. Better of spending some time in thoughtful prayer my friend.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


February 5th, 2014, 5:48 pm
Profile WWW
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3039
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
Trust me Pablo, I'm still very much in prayer!

I know that in days gone by, especially in the Christian thread, there has been a lot of comment to the sharing of information and my unwillingness to read or research any other belief system. I only shared this link because I knew it was something you were interested in, but like I said above, I don't have a horse in the game.

Many of the discussions or arguments going on concerning the authenticity of the Earth Age, and so on, are irrelevant to what's at stake. In my mind the are the equivalent of chasing rabbits. For me personally, my eyes/life are/is focused on one person, Jesus Christ, and my relationship with Him; all else is chasing rabbits. I'm making an assumption here because I'm not going to listen to it but, I'm imagine that both had their "evidence" towards what they believe, and both probably presented interesting perspectives. But that's just it, it's a perspective based upon their chosen evidence.

So I could weigh in on one topic, or another, or I could chase this rabbit or that one, but in the end, I've taken my eyes off the One who means the most to me, and that's MY Christianity. No rules or regulations, no 14 Our Father's because I swore last Thursday, no confessions to a man, no Traditions be they Catholic or Christian. Just a relationship based upon time, interaction, and obedience in the moment. That's all I've tried to share.

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


February 6th, 2014, 9:42 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9490
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
interesting article from this morning...

Quote:
Camel bones suggest error in Bible, archaeologists say

Archaeologists from Israel’s top university have used radiocarbon dating to pinpoint the arrival of domestic camels in the Middle East -- and they say the science directly contradicts the Bible’s version of events.

Camels are mentioned as pack animals in the biblical stories of Abraham, Joseph and Jacob, Old Testament stories that historians peg to between 2000 and 1500 BC. But Erez Ben-Yosef and Lidar Sapir-Hen of Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology and Near Eastern Cultures say camels weren’t domesticated in Israel until centuries later, more like 900 BC.

“In addition to challenging the Bible's historicity, this anachronism is direct proof that the text was compiled well after the events it describes,” reads a press release announcing the research.

To find the first camel, Sapir-Hen and Ben-Yosef used radiocarbon dating to analyze the oldest known camel bones in the Arabian Peninsula, found at the remains of a copper smelting camp in the Aravah Valley, which runs along the border with Jordan from the Dead Sea to the Red Sea.

The bones were in archaeological layers dating from the last third of the 10th century BC or later — centuries after the patriarchs lived and decades after the Kingdom of David, according to the Bible, the researchers said. The few camel bones found in earlier archaeological layers probably belonged to wild camels, which archaeologists think lived there during the Neolithic period or even earlier.

Notably, all the sites active in the 9th century in the Arava Valley had camel bones, but none of the sites that were active earlier contained them.

"The introduction of the camel to our region was a very important economic and social development," Ben-Yosef said. "By analyzing archaeological evidence from the copper production sites of the Aravah Valley, we were able to estimate the date of this event in terms of decades rather than centuries."

The arrival of domesticated camels promoted trade between Israel and exotic locations unreachable before, according to the researchers. Camels can travel over much longer distances than donkeys and mules, opening up trade routes like the Incense Road that stretched from Africa through Israel to India.


http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/02/ ... -in-bible/

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


February 6th, 2014, 9:47 am
Profile WWW
Lionbacker Rehab Guru
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2006, 9:08 pm
Posts: 1203
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
This review of the debate from Breitbart.com

Quote:
Only the two far extremes – atheistic evolution as argued by Nye, and "Young Earth Creationism" as argued by Ham – were represented. Supporters of three major schools of thought that would have vigorously argued in the affirmative – theistic evolution, intelligent design, and "Old Earth Creationism" – were not invited to participate.

Francis S. Collins, the human genome expert who heads the National Institute of Health and a leading proponent of theistic evolution, was not invited to participate. Nor was William Demski, mathematics expert, Christian theologian, fellow at the Discovery Institute, and leading proponent of intelligent design. Hugh Ross, the PhD. in Astronomy who has dedicated a lifetime of research based on the scientific method to support the theory of "Old Earth Creationism," was also notably absent.


http://cdn.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/02/05/Bill-Nye-Ken-Ham-Media-Event-Was-No-Debate-on-Creation-as-a-Model-of-Origins

_________________
Climate Change - happening every second, of every minute of every day ever since the world was created. Needless to say it's man's fault.


February 7th, 2014, 11:33 am
Profile
Lionbacker Rehab Guru
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2006, 9:08 pm
Posts: 1203
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
Pablo wrote:
interesting article from this morning...

Quote:
Camel bones suggest error in Bible, archaeologists say

Archaeologists from Israel’s top university have used radiocarbon dating to pinpoint the arrival of domestic camels in the Middle East -- and they say the science directly contradicts the Bible’s version of events.

Camels are mentioned as pack animals in the biblical stories of Abraham, Joseph and Jacob, Old Testament stories that historians peg to between 2000 and 1500 BC. But Erez Ben-Yosef and Lidar Sapir-Hen of Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology and Near Eastern Cultures say camels weren’t domesticated in Israel until centuries later, more like 900 BC.

“In addition to challenging the Bible's historicity, this anachronism is direct proof that the text was compiled well after the events it describes,” reads a press release announcing the research.

To find the first camel, Sapir-Hen and Ben-Yosef used radiocarbon dating to analyze the oldest known camel bones in the Arabian Peninsula, found at the remains of a copper smelting camp in the Aravah Valley, which runs along the border with Jordan from the Dead Sea to the Red Sea.

The bones were in archaeological layers dating from the last third of the 10th century BC or later — centuries after the patriarchs lived and decades after the Kingdom of David, according to the Bible, the researchers said. The few camel bones found in earlier archaeological layers probably belonged to wild camels, which archaeologists think lived there during the Neolithic period or even earlier.

Notably, all the sites active in the 9th century in the Arava Valley had camel bones, but none of the sites that were active earlier contained them.

"The introduction of the camel to our region was a very important economic and social development," Ben-Yosef said. "By analyzing archaeological evidence from the copper production sites of the Aravah Valley, we were able to estimate the date of this event in terms of decades rather than centuries."

The arrival of domesticated camels promoted trade between Israel and exotic locations unreachable before, according to the researchers. Camels can travel over much longer distances than donkeys and mules, opening up trade routes like the Incense Road that stretched from Africa through Israel to India.


http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/02/ ... -in-bible/

For someone who professes an acceptance of many ideas of religion, spirituality and faith, you sure seem focused on attacking Christianity.

_________________
Climate Change - happening every second, of every minute of every day ever since the world was created. Needless to say it's man's fault.


February 7th, 2014, 11:35 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9490
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
TruckinMack wrote:
For someone who professes an acceptance of many ideas of religion, spirituality and faith, you sure seem focused on attacking Christianity.


If you see posting that article as an attack, so be it. If you see pointing out errors in the book as an attack, that is your prerogative. I happen to use critical thinking in my approach, I know that doesn't sit with many of you well who would like me to ditch that and just "believe" first and accept everything as the "truth".

That said, what you will find me "attacking" continuously is the Bible itself as it is full of errors, absurdities and lacks originality. This doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't the son of God, but does cast a pretty big shadow on the validity of that claim if one points to the Bible as proof or truth that he is.

In the courts they use the term "reasonable doubt". If there was limited errors in the Bible, I might chalk it up to translation errors and the such. But the truth is, there are so many issues with the book that the "doubt" is well beyond "reasonable".

Since nobody is slinging Islam or any other major faith on here, I see no need to address them specifically, although I'd certainly be happy to cast "reasonable doubt" on pretty much any major religious text you would like to throw out. I'm also willing to look at your faith in any manner you'd like. The Bible is the easiest target, because it is the one that most believers point to as proof. If you have other "proof" that your particular faith is correct outside of the holy book, I'd sure like to examine it.

As a critical thinker, when I examine the Bible I'm looking to see if it was truly "inspired by God". As such, I have certain expectations, unfortunately the book just doesn't hold up and honestly it isn't even close.

What's funny is that when any other book is examined, it is fine to look at it using critical thinking. Even Christians think this way when a book like the Da Vinci Code is released. Reviews will say things like it was "full of calumnies, offenses, and historical and theological errors" (and most of those claims were correct btw) - why can't we apply the same line of thinking to the greatest author of all time? Heck, Christians banned and burned the Harry Potter books without even reading them.

So what do you think off all the "calumnies, offenses, and historical and theological errors" in the Bible to use a quote from a Da Vinci review? Does it raise "reasonable doubt" in its authenticity?

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


February 7th, 2014, 1:37 pm
Profile WWW
Lionbacker Rehab Guru
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2006, 9:08 pm
Posts: 1203
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
Pablo wrote:
TruckinMack wrote:
For someone who professes an acceptance of many ideas of religion, spirituality and faith, you sure seem focused on attacking Christianity.

If you see posting that article as an attack, so be it.
So it be.

An attack from one who believes in nothing and in everything... It's like a kid standing atop an ivory tower throwing stones on everyone on the ground. You are certainly allowed to throw stones back, but being up in his ivory tower, he is pretty safe.

_________________
Climate Change - happening every second, of every minute of every day ever since the world was created. Needless to say it's man's fault.


February 7th, 2014, 1:45 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9490
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
TruckinMack wrote:
Pablo wrote:
TruckinMack wrote:
For someone who professes an acceptance of many ideas of religion, spirituality and faith, you sure seem focused on attacking Christianity.

If you see posting that article as an attack, so be it.
So it be.

An attack from one who believes in nothing and in everything... It's like a kid standing atop an ivory tower throwing stones on everyone on the ground. You are certainly allowed to throw stones back, but being up in his ivory tower, he is pretty safe.


If that is how you see it, I apologize. I'll also back out of this discussion since in my quest to gain better understanding of how each of you have reached your faith is being seen as offensive. I've been known to push and challenge to get a response and then dig deeper at that. That is usually when I can find some common ground to use as a base of a discussion.

And as someone who "believes in nothing and in everything", you obviously haven't ever walked in my shoes given the way you describe it. As someone who was one "of faith" and now finds himself "void of it", the much easier stance (the ivory tower if you will), was the former.

Don't believe me, go out there and tell folks you are either Atheist or Agnostic, you will see what it is really like to have stones cast down upon thee. It is kind of like your analogy, except instead of a tower there is a hole in the ground (some might call it hell) and everyone above ground is throwing rocks down upon you. You can certainly throw a rock up, you will likely hit someone, but the sky is blacked out by the sheer number of rocks heading your way.

I'm outta here, y'all have a great weekend!

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


February 7th, 2014, 2:31 pm
Profile WWW
Lionbacker Rehab Guru
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2006, 9:08 pm
Posts: 1203
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
Pablo wrote:
Don't believe me, go out there and tell folks you are either Atheist or Agnostic, you will see what it is really like to have stones cast down upon thee. It is kind of like your analogy, except instead of a tower there is a hole in the ground (some might call it hell) and everyone above ground is throwing rocks down upon you. You can certainly throw a rock up, you will likely hit someone, but the sky is blacked out by the sheer number of rocks heading your way.

I'm outta here, y'all have a great weekend!
So why do you choose to mimic the behavior of casting stones?
If you are interested in tearing apart organized religion, bring it.

If you are interested in open conversation about faith, bring that.

You are having difficulty doing both.

FWIW, I can get all the stone-ege I want from my own Catholic church, just by talking about my Catholic faith... though, oddly enough, not from my priest. He seems to be even more ecumenical that I am.

_________________
Climate Change - happening every second, of every minute of every day ever since the world was created. Needless to say it's man's fault.


February 7th, 2014, 3:00 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2696
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
To sort of speak to what Pablo is saying, the reason why so many atheists seem to be arrogant ***holes is because it takes a big set of balls to be a vocal nonbeliever. A lot of people will despise you, want nothing to do with you, think there's something wrong with you, etc. And that's in the North. I can only imagine how bad it would be in the Bible belt.

So, just by process of elimination, the only people willing to be vocal about their disbelief are going to be headstrong people that generally don't give a ****, or who don't think much of others' opinions.


February 7th, 2014, 3:16 pm
Profile
Lionbacker Rehab Guru
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2006, 9:08 pm
Posts: 1203
Post Re: Christian vs Science debate tonight
Blueskies wrote:
To sort of speak to what Pablo is saying, the reason why so many atheists seem to be arrogant ***holes is because it takes a big set of balls to be a vocal nonbeliever. A lot of people will despise you, want nothing to do with you, think there's something wrong with you, etc. And that's in the North. I can only imagine how bad it would be in the Bible belt.

So, just by process of elimination, the only people willing to be vocal about their disbelief are going to be headstrong people that generally don't give a ****, or who don't think much of others' opinions.
Which would make sense if you were in a room full of people who hate you (or really, really don't like you) for being an atheist. (BS: The reason you and I do not get along has nothing to do with your faith.)

It seems at http://www.Lionbacker.com, we are mostly respectful and accepting one another. I don't see a reason for anger or insult for virtually any discussion. I mean sure, if it's time for a pissing match count me in, but really I have more fun exchanging ideas that getting sprayed with urine.

_________________
Climate Change - happening every second, of every minute of every day ever since the world was created. Needless to say it's man's fault.


February 7th, 2014, 3:30 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.