Large Scale Central

They're after our firearms, again

A change of heart, mind and spirit in only one direction, with only one possible outcome? Is it only changes you like?

mike omalley said:
A change of heart, mind and spirit in only one direction, with only one possible outcome? Is it only changes you like?
I do not understand? Man has a free will to accept or reject anything. You'd agree that by not making a decision, you have made a decision? Decide to change or decide to not change, but change you will.
TonyWalsham said:
Ralph Berg said:
mike omalley said:
For a lot of people, religion seems to be mostly about the pleasure of thinking you are in a lifeboat while others are drowning.
Is this not how life is Mike? I am right, you are wrong and neither is willing to concede the possibility they are wrong? Why would you expect religion to be any different. Not to pick on Tony.........but he is a perfect example. He places the burden of proof on the opposition, feeling no need to prove his view. He is not alone. Most people feel this way. Ralph
More long bows Ralph.

I don’t say God doesn’t exist.

I just say how about some proof.


Long bows?
No one can prove if God exists. Just as no one can prove he doesn’t.
I said something like, even if evolution is proven, how do you know the “accident” of nature that starts the process was not a miracle of God?
You said “First you must prove God exists” or something close to that. You require no “proof” that an “accident” can start the evolution process.
One idea is no more far fetched than the other.
Ralph

Here is what Tony said:
Prove that God exists and you prove Creationist theories might be right.

I had to look through three different threads to find it.
Might be right ? The possibility does not even exist until there is proof of a God?

Time, Space, and Matter

There is an immeasurably and unimaginably huge universe out there (even though the most important part of it appears to be here). The physical universe is “temporal”—its physical characteristics are defined qualitatively and quantitatively in and by time, space, and mass/energy (usually abbreviated as just “matter”).

Any effort to determine the cause of the universe is purely hypothetical. No human was there to observe the processes, so any attempt to understand events of pre-history (especially original events) must, therefore, be based on “belief systems,” or presuppositions. While the theories and ideas may be many, the presuppositions can only be of two sorts: 1) there is an infinite series of causes, going back into infinite time, with no ultimate Cause; or 2) there exists an uncaused First Cause that was “outside” or transcendent to the universe.

Many scientists today conduct their research based on their presupposition or belief that nothing exists beyond the natural world—that which can be seen around us—and thus they do not accept that any ultimate Cause exists.

Scientists at ICR hold to the presupposition that the “uncaused First Cause” is the Creator who exists outside of the physical creation He made. Time is not eternal, but created. To ask what happened in time before time was created is to create a false paradox without meaning. There was no “before” prior to the creation of the triune universe of time, space, and mass/energy.

http://www.icr.org/first-cause/

David,
look to your reference - Institution of Creation Research. Do we see a possible bias in their supposed findings? If you want to prove the existence of God then you need references to unrefutable mainstream publications of a scientific nature, not madeup semi-religious material, purporting to be a result of scientific research.

    You may have missed this reference to the credentials of the main players in the creationist movement,  highlighting that many received their degrees as either honary or from disputed 'centres of learning'.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html

David,
I do not care what you believe or what you interpret a word to mean. The Catholic Church has as one of its undeniable beliefs that the Pope is God’s representative on earth and that in acts of faith and doctrine his teachings are infallible, i.e., the teaching of God himself and that is not to be disputed. To not believe this, is denial of not just the Church, but of God himself. You are an ana papist and deny God’s representative on earth, therefore you are outside of the one Church and thus not a 'C’hristian, but a 'c’hristian. The Catholic Church comprises the Church as administered from the Vatican and the eastern Orthodox Churches. Anything else is not part of the Catholic Church! You don’t like that, well go read your bible or maybe another source of light fictional reading, like maybe, a good weekly woman’s magazine with lots of nice pictures and minimal print.

Deleted

Deleted

TonyWalsham said:
Evolution does not need proof or disproof of God to be a valid fact. Creationism does require proof of the existence of God to be true.
Tony, AMEN to that.
Tim Brien said:
David, look to your reference - Institution of Creation Research. Do we see a possible bias in their supposed findings? If you want to prove the existence of God then you need references to unrefutable mainstream publications of a scientific nature, not madeup semi-religious material, purporting to be a result of scientific research.
Maybe it is you with the bias. Check the credentials of the scientists on staff again, and if you have a problem with them or their findings, take it up with them. I'm sure they'd be happy to explain.

So I should find evidence of Creation Science research from evolution theory scientists? Now, that wouldn’t be a biased source, now would it?

Tim Brien said:
David, I do not care what you believe or what you interpret a word to mean. The Catholic Church has as one of its undeniable beliefs that the Pope is God's representative on earth and that in acts of faith and doctrine his teachings are infallible, i.e., the teaching of God himself and that is not to be disputed. To not believe this, is denial of not just the Church, but of God himself. You are an ana papist and deny God's representative on earth, therefore you are outside of the one Church and thus not a 'C'hristian, but a 'c'hristian. The Catholic Church comprises the Church as administered from the Vatican and the eastern Orthodox Churches. Anything else is not part of the Catholic Church! You don't like that, well go read your bible or maybe another source of light fictional reading, like maybe, a good weekly woman's magazine with lots of nice pictures and minimal print.
You mean there is a human being on Earth whose teachings are infallible? WOW!

Deleted

David Hill said:
So I should find evidence of Creation Science research from evolution theory scientists? Now, that wouldn't be a biased source, now would it?
David, the point has been totally missed. Let religion do its job and leave science to scientists. It does not matter in the scheme of things if God created the heaven and the earth, five billion years ago or five minutes ago. God is about religion and not science. God is a faith-based belief and science is a factual-based belief, supported by irrefutable evidence. Why attempt to mix the two?
Tim Brien said:
David Hill said:
So I should find evidence of Creation Science research from evolution theory scientists? Now, that wouldn't be a biased source, now would it?
David, the point has been totally missed. Let religion do its job and leave science to scientists. It does not matter in the scheme of things if God created the heaven and the earth, five billion years ago or five minutes ago. God is about religion and not science. God is a faith-based belief and science is a factual-based belief, supported by irrefutable evidence. Why attempt to mix the two?
Why attempt to separate the two, Tim? Science is science, allow the facts to lead where they do rather than attempt to confine them to a pre-determined outcome.
David Hill said:
You mean there is a human being on Earth whose teachings are infallible? WOW!
David, as stated previously, this is one of the irrefutable core beliefs of the Catholic Church. If one is not prepared to accept that the Pope is God's representative on earth, then that explains why you are not part of the Catholic Church.

Opps!

TonyWalsham said:

David Hill said:

Steve Featherkile said:
David, by that standard, some Evangelicals and Pentecostals and even SDA’s are not Christian.

Those are all titles for a “club membership”. True Christianity is a change of heart, mind and spirit, which is why the Dingo-bat’s assertion of AH being a Christian is so absurd.

David. It is not I who is asserting Adolf Hitler was a Christian. It was Hitler himself and is proven by all the documentary evidence that I have pointed out to you. Why is it so embarrasing for you that Hitler really was a Christian? It wasn’t your fault. Plus the Roman Catholic ddin’t seem to mind. They did not excommunicate him and Hitler died a Roman Catholic. There are none so blind as those that do not want to see. Adolf Hitler was a Christian. Adolf Hitler proposed the “final solution”. You profess to be a Christian. Does that mean as a Christian, you also propose a “final solution” for all Jews, Gypsies and undesirables? Do you do also deny the Holocaust happened?

(http://www.lscdata.com/users/lastmanout/_forumfiles/popcorn.gif)

Tim Brien said:
David Hill said:
You mean there is a human being on Earth whose teachings are infallible? WOW!
David, as stated previously, this is one of the irrefutable core beliefs of the Catholic Church. If one is not prepared to accept that the Pope is God's representative on earth, then that explains why you are not part of the Catholic Church.
Agreed, and I will not attempt to condemn Catholics for their beliefs. I honestly did not realize the Pope had that level of authority.

I just have a different faith than they/you do.

David Hill said:
Why attempt to separate the two, Tim? Science is science, allow the facts to lead where they do rather than attempt to confine them to a pre-determined outcome.
David, You believe that a god exists, without proof and yet speak of a 'pre-determined outcome'. How does proving creation happened 6000 years ago prove the existence of God and what does it really matter when creation occurred? The belief should be that God created the heavens and the earth, thus making the exact timing totally irrelevant. How does it advance man's understanding of God to know exactly when the hand of God was deployed? It is not God's will that we know, but man's insecurity in his faith.

Deleted