Why Do You Remain A Christian?

[★ Citsonga ★]

My link

 

This is just one of many links to describe the meaning of the word used in Genesis

 

Was it really a snake? A most common definition has been cobra or fish snake on many other sites.

 

One site suggested the word used implied this animal was created this way from the start because the name had a meaning of crawl.

 

I don't really know

 

Your original link didn't work, but I've fixed the problem here.

 

I find it interesting that you want to point to NT claims to justify the belief that the serpent was satan, yet you ignore the fact that the NT (written in Greek) calls it a serpent when you post this suggestion that the Hebrew term in Genesis 3 may mean something else.

 

I don't know Hebrew, but I do know that every English translation I've looked at Genesis 3 in renders the term as "serpent" or "snake."

 

Here's the Strong's definition:

 

nachnash

 

1) serpent, snake

a ) serpent

b ) image (of serpent)

c ) fleeing serpent (mythological)

 

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H5175&t=KJV

 

So, the definition is "serpent, snake," and the sub-definitions under that pertain to the serpent.

 

Now, I fully realize that eventually people started associating the serpent in the garden with satan. That doesn't change the fact, though, that the term means serpent, and there is no claim in Genesis 3 that it was satan. Simply put, it's a later concept read back into the story, not something derived from the story.

 

And, again, you're left with the dilemma of god being unjust to punish serpents if the "serpent" in the garden was merely a manifestation of satan. Of course, unjust behavior isn't uncommon with the god of the bible, but christians claim that god is not unjust, so it is a valid point to bring up the serpent's punishment.

[Guest Spinoza]

You want Proof of "God" (Whatever that is)???

 

I will give you Living Proof ..... Are you ready for this.

You will not be able to deny the Proof I give. I can absolutely guarantee that.

Get ready to open your eyes. It is right in front of you and you do not see it.

 

Here is the Proof ..... Deuteronomy 7:5-7

 

"For you are a people holy to the LORD your God.

The LORD your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.

The LORD did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples."

 

The Proof is the Jewish People. The Chosen Race. Is this just a coincidence ?

 

Your Proof is Adam, Eve, Abraham, Moses, Noah, Jesus, John, James, Thomas, Spinoza, Einstein, Sagan, Hitchens, Zuckerburg, Ellison, Brin, etc etc etc to infinity...

 

Their mind, their intellect, their wisdom, their science. You cannot deny this.

And I am not Jewish and I am not an anti-Semite. But the Proof is there for all to see.

 

What more Proof do you need ? The Jewish People are the Living Proof and Testament of "God's" Existence.

 

Even Christopher Hitchens, who denies this Existence. (He has forgotten Spinoza)

 

The real question is this. What is God ? For that you will need to go and read Baruch Spinoza's Ethics. It is Crystal Clear what "God" is. Albert Einstein and Carl Sagan and the (mythical)Lumionous Nazarene who called himself "God" understood this.

 

Now you have proof. repent and realize that "God" is One. There is nothing separate from God.

 

If God/Nature or the Universe is infinite how is it possible to make yourself separate from the infinite.

 

"That" is an impossibility.

 

The infinite contains everything - that means You. You are not in any way, shape or form separate from the Infinite. That is impossible.

[Ouroboros]

Spinoza,

 

I'm a bit confused. It sounds like you are arguing for the Jewish God while arguing that it's the same as Spinoza's God. Was that your intention?

[Legion]

I don't have many qualms with people who have an "everything is God" sort of mojo. Spinoza has been given credit for sparking the enlightenment. But I don't see what that has to do with Deuteronomy 7:5-7.

[Guest Spinoza]

Spinoza,

 

I'm a bit confused. It sounds like you are arguing for the Jewish God while arguing that it's the same as Spinoza's God. Was that your intention?

 

They are One and the same. Ein od Milvado. God is One. Does not mean that there is One God .....it means that There is Only God.

 

God is Everything and Everything is God.

 

That is what Jesus was teaching..... You will do things far greater than I ?? How is that possible when he is God ?????

 

Spinoza was explaining this when he also got kicked out of his church. (Temple)

[Antlerman]

I don't have many qualms with people who have an "everything is God" sort of mojo. Spinoza has been given credit for sparking the enlightenment. But I don't see what that has to do with Deuteronomy 7:5-7.

I have to admit, I hearing a barrage of confused thoughts all presented together without a clear idea of what is actually being considered. Like you, I asked what does God existing have to do with the Bible and the Jews? Is he trying to say the Bible is God's? And that because the Jews exist this means God exists? That's bad logic.

 

Hell, I may just take that apart just because it's something to do.....

[Guest Spinoza]

I don't have many qualms with people who have an "everything is God" sort of mojo. Spinoza has been given credit for sparking the enlightenment. But I don't see what that has to do with Deuteronomy 7:5-7.

 

Deuteronomy 7:5-7 is Physical Proof of "God" - It's Prophecy is fulfilled by the very Jewish People..... http://www.jinfo.org/index.html

 

They are the World's Treasure. (genius, intellect, wisdom etc etc )

 

.0019 % of the World's Population yet 50 % of the Worlds' brightest Minds ???? It is a Statistical Improbability.

 

I am not Racist, I am not anti-semitic, I am a Rationalist that can see a Miracle when I see One.

 

[Antlerman]

Spinoza,

 

I'm a bit confused. It sounds like you are arguing for the Jewish God while arguing that it's the same as Spinoza's God. Was that your intention?

 

They are One and the same. Ein od Milvado. God is One. Does not mean that there is One God .....it means that There is Only God.

 

God is Everything and Everything is God.

 

That is what Jesus was teaching..... You will do things far greater than I ?? How is that possible when he is God ?????

 

Spinoza was explaining this when he also got kicked out of his church. (Temple)

You're claiming the Bible teaches pantheism? I don't think so.

 

Can you tell me where Jesus teaches pantheism?

[Guest Spinoza]

Spinoza,

 

I'm a bit confused. It sounds like you are arguing for the Jewish God while arguing that it's the same as Spinoza's God. Was that your intention?

 

They are One and the same. Ein od Milvado. God is One. Does not mean that there is One God .....it means that There is Only God.

 

God is Everything and Everything is God.

 

That is what Jesus was teaching..... You will do things far greater than I ?? How is that possible when he is God ?????

 

Spinoza was explaining this when he also got kicked out of his church. (Temple)

You're claiming the Bible teaches pantheism? I don't think so.

 

 

Luke 17:21 and all of the Gospel of Thomas... "Pick up a piece of wood and I am there Look under a stone and I am there also"

 

Can you tell me where Jesus teaches pantheism?

[Antlerman]

I don't have many qualms with people who have an "everything is God" sort of mojo. Spinoza has been given credit for sparking the enlightenment. But I don't see what that has to do with Deuteronomy 7:5-7.

 

Deuteronomy 7:5-7 is Physical Proof of "God" - It's Prophecy is fulfilled by the very Jewish People..... http://www.jinfo.org/index.html

 

They are the World's Treasure. (genius, intellect, wisdom etc etc )

 

.0019 % of the World's Population yet 50 % of the Worlds' brightest Minds ???? It is a Statistical Improbability.

Where in the world of sanity did you come up with this statistic?? 50% of the world's brightest minds?? Give me you research on that one.

 

I am not Racist, I am not anti-semitic, I am a Rationalist that can see a Miracle when I see One.

Frankly, seeing how loose and sloppy and zealous you are, I would not call you a Rationalist at all. To be fair.

[Ouroboros]

Spinoza,

 

I'm a bit confused. It sounds like you are arguing for the Jewish God while arguing that it's the same as Spinoza's God. Was that your intention?

 

They are One and the same. Ein od Milvado. God is One. Does not mean that there is One God .....it means that There is Only God.

 

God is Everything and Everything is God.

 

That is what Jesus was teaching..... You will do things far greater than I ?? How is that possible when he is God ?????

 

Spinoza was explaining this when he also got kicked out of his church. (Temple)

So correct me if I'm wrong, you are making the claim that the Jewish God is the impersonal nature? My understanding (which is rather limited here) is that Spinoza argued that Nature and God were the same.

 

But that's not the impression I have from the Old Testament and the Jewish God image. I find it a bit difficult to see how they go together. And you're saying that Jesus was teaching this God image as well? It's also a bit strange to see if you read the New Testament.

 

However, I could see perhaps an argument that somehow the original or authentic message of Jesus was to preach about this Nature God, and that the followers screwed it up and spun the message to mean something else.

 

Even so, didn't Spinoza define (and prove) God without the Bible and without the Jewish faith? So why does the Old Testament somehow prove Spinoza's God?

 

I'm still confused...

[Ouroboros]

They are the World's Treasure. (genius, intellect, wisdom etc etc )

 

.0019 % of the World's Population yet 50 % of the Worlds' brightest Minds ???? It is a Statistical Improbability.

 

I am not Racist, I am not anti-semitic, I am a Rationalist that can see a Miracle when I see One.

And I can see natural selection when I see one.

 

It can totally be explained through environmental pressure and sexual selection. So there's no miracle besides Nature and natural forces there.

[Ouroboros]

You're claiming the Bible teaches pantheism? I don't think so.

 

Can you tell me where Jesus teaches pantheism?

Luke 17:21 and all of the Gospel of Thomas... "Pick up a piece of wood and I am there Look under a stone and I am there also"

Luke 17:21 "nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst." (Or within you)

 

It could be interpreted as the Church rising up within the midst of the Jewish people. It could also be interpreted as God taking residence within people who didn't have it before.

 

Gospel of Thomas... sure, but is that in canon?

[Guest ephymeris]

OMG Spinoza, please stop using so many ?????????????????????'s. It is excessive and doesn't make you seem very rational. Just saying.

[the stranger]

OK, I have did as much study as I wish to do at this time on the subject.

 

First, my intention here will not be to try to persuade all of you that there is a God and that science proofs that there is a God. I have read all of the sites given (listened to one) and plus looked at others with the same view point. I have found this to be true.

 

For those who will believe in Christ, we will see the evidence quite clearly.

 

For those who do not want to believe in God, there will always be reason to doubt.

 

What my intent here will be is to show that there is scientific reason to believe in God and of a young earth.

 

 

I want to start out by showing you reason #1 that one could have to doubt evolution and support creation.

 

 

Did Darwin become a Christian on his deathbed?

 

My linkhttp://carm.org/secular-movements/evolution/did-darwin-become-christian-his-deathbed

 

 

This site gives clear indications that this is a true statement. If so, the very foundings of the theory is then in question, as the founder seems to make it known that he was wrong and wanted Christ preached to the world.

 

 

 

 

The following link shows clearly that the creation side of things is not only rejected, though showing proof of evidence, but not even allowed to have a fair review. If evolution is so true, why is there a fear of open reviews and/or debates?

 

My link

 

 

For the rest of my links, I will copy some of the most interesting things to ponder.

 

 

 

The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.

 

existence of GodThe Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day

 

 

The universe has not always existed. It had a start...what caused that? Scientists have no explanation for the sudden explosion of light and matter.

 

 

Much of life may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change -- on earth or in galaxies far from us.

 

How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable?

 

I didn't realize that the reason the topic of God weighed so heavily on my mind, was because God was pressing the issue. I have come to find out that God wants to be known. He created us with the intention that we would know him. He has surrounded us with evidence of himself and he keeps the question of his existence squarely before us. It was as if I couldn't escape thinking about the possibility of God. In fact, the day I chose to acknowledge God's existence, my prayer began with, "Ok, you win..." It might be that the underlying reason atheists are bothered by people believing in God is because God is actively pursuing them.

 

My link

 

 

Richard Dawkins, a British zoologist and one of the world's foremost apologists for classical Darwinism, addressed the question of design in his 1996 essay collection, Climbing Mount Improbable,{2} by contrasting particular, designed artifacts with similar accidents in nature. Dawkins illustrates the concept of design with the example of Mount Rushmore, upon which are carved the clearly recognizable images of Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt (Figure 1). By contrast, a naturally occurring rock in Hawaii casts a shadow that resembles President John F. Kennedy (Figure 2), illustrating an accidental occurrence in nature. It is self-evident that a sculptor (in this case, Gutzon Borglum) carved Mount Rushmore. The sheer number of details in which the Mount Rushmore faces resemble the faces of the four presidents testifies to the presence of an intelligent cause, a human sculptor. No one could seriously attribute these magnificent faces to the creative forces of wind, rain, sleet, and hail.

 

Figure 1. An intelligent design: Mount Rushmore with presidents Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Lincoln.

Figure 2. An accident of nature: President John F. Kennedy's profile formed by shadow cast by a large rock in Hawaii.

 

My linkhttp://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9403/evidence.html

 

 

 

I will be honest with al of you. I have went to and copied so many websites, and have looked at more than just my side of things, and I could go on and on, link after link, but that would just get annoying quick.

 

I will only copy a few more sites down as they draw to some of the questions that I was asked. The point thus far, there is at least as much reason for me to believe in God is there is for the alternitive.

 

This next link is concerning the reliability of some of the testing concerning the age of the earth:

 

(1) radiometric testing

 

My link

 

(2) tree dating

 

My link

 

(3) carbon testing

 

My link

 

 

And about the flood

 

My link

 

 

age of the dinosoars

 

My link

 

 

IF YOU SEE NO OTHER LINKS, PLEASE VISIT THIS ONE. IT SHOWS QUITE CLEARLY WHAT THE TEST SAY ABOUT THE AGE OF THE EARTH.

 

 

My link

 

This one is about the question of light years, the time it takes light to travel.

 

My link

 

 

These two sites are just showing more proofs of a young earth.

 

 

My link

 

My link

 

This site is just some good old fashion questions for all of you to think about.

 

 

My link

 

=======================================================================================================

 

 

OK, that is it, I will post no further links. My point is not to make you believe in God, but to show you that there is evidence behind our believe, and it would greatly rival any to the contrary.

 

 

You may say "the only thing you have is others thoughts". You would be right to a degree. My smarts are not in this field, so just like the rest rely on others to show them what they cannot know first hand for themselves, I sometimes must do the same, using the sites that best fit my believes. I would dare say we all do this sort of thing when we do not know the answers for ourselves.

 

Now we could go on debating others handy work, but I do not think any more evidence on either side will change our thoughts that we already have established.

 

If none of you choose to believe, that is our freedom and right, but the Christians faith is not a blind faith by any stretch of the emangination.

 

Both sides can show what they believe to be proof, but it is up to us to decide.

 

===========================================================================================================

 

I will respond to earlier postings a bit later, but only of those that has not already been covered by this study.

 

It is a poor study, I know, but it is proof eneugh for me to believe beyond a shadow of doubt.

 

God bless and I will talk later.

 

===========================================================================================================

 

Ouroborus, It was not until the day before yesterday I realized your positioning. Thank you for the advise on reading your past postings. Also for the links. I really admired three out of them.

 

I will probably start shifting my energy to an area of study that I am a little more in touch with after I finish all my replies on this topic.

 

I respect you all and do not dismiss the knowledge that God gave us all, but some things are certainly things in which we will never agree on, with "proofs" going in what ever direction one wants it to go.

[Ouroboros]

For those who will believe in Christ, we will see the evidence quite clearly.

 

For those who do not want to believe in God, there will always be reason to doubt.

 

What my intent here will be is to show that there is scientific reason to believe in God and of a young earth.

Aaargh! (pulling my hair in frustration)

 

I want to start out by showing you reason #1 that one could have to doubt evolution and support creation.

 

Did Darwin become a Christian on his deathbed?

My linkhttp://carm.org/secular-movements/evolution/did-darwin-become-christian-his-deathbed

This site gives clear indications that this is a true statement. If so, the very foundings of the theory is then in question, as the founder seems to make it known that he was wrong and wanted Christ preached to the world.

The idea that Darwin became a Christian on his deathbed was denied by his family, and the rumors started with a Christian, Lady Hope, in the 19th century. All so called "evidences" for Darwin's conversion are fabricated. CARM is a website with a lot of very imaginative people creating evidences for their belief. And they do so, because they can't accept that there aren't any.

 

Lady Hope's story does not jive with Darwin's views on quotes during his lifetime. It's one of the most ridiculous lies Christians have cooked up, and it shows how willingly Christians resort to deceit to convert people. It makes me sick.

 

For instance, Darwin is supposed to have said, "I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything, and to my astonishment, the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion of them." It doesn't fit how the story went down. He spent decades putting together the theory, and the reason why he pushed for the book to be published was that Wallace had come up with the same theory (evolution by natural selection) and Darwin wanted to beat him. And the theory did not catch on like a wildfire. It was criticized, analyzed, inspected, tested, refined, improved, over many, many years. Darwin had his book reprinted with small changes several times. To think that somehow he just wrote something silly and everyone misunderstood him is hilariously STUPID. But that's what you get when you believe in fairy tales...

 

The following link shows clearly that the creation side of things is not only rejected, though showing proof of evidence, but not even allowed to have a fair review. If evolution is so true, why is there a fear of open reviews and/or debates?

 

My link

The reason why creationism doesn't have equal opportunity for debate is because 99% of scientists reject it. The same reason why astronomers find it a waste of time debating with UFO conspirators.

[Guest Valk0010]

I am kind of busy this evening, so I will just address one point you made, about darwin being a christian. True or not, darwin converting on his death bed, doesn't throw evolutionary theory in doubt, evolutionary theory has been confirmed since darwin, darwin is not some god.

 

Also, while I don't think its possible personally, but other seem to, you can be an evolutionist and a christian, famous examples, Francis Collins, Ken Miller.

[Ouroboros]

For the rest of my links, I will copy some of the most interesting things to ponder.

 

The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.

 

existence of GodThe Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day

The problem is that we do not circle around the sun in a perfect circle. Our planet is moving around the sun in a huge ellipse. Do you know what an ellipse is? Our distance to the sun changes about 5-10% over a year.

 

So what fractional variance would make it impossible? 5/100 and 10/100 are fractions.

 

And the axis on which the planet is rotation has changed multiple times in history.

 

The size of the planet, sure, but if the planet was the size of Jupiter, we would rapidly fall into the sun because the mass would be too great, or the rotation around the sun would increase dramatically.

 

The universe has not always existed. It had a start...what caused that? Scientists have no explanation for the sudden explosion of light and matter.

Do you have an explanation to God's existence? No? "Always existed" It's a cop-out.

 

Explain God's existence and where he came from. Otherwise your argument is dumb.

 

Much of life may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change -- on earth or in galaxies far from us.

The gravity is not consistent over the planets surface. There is a physical correlation between mass and gravity, and because our planet is not a perfect sphere (it's compressed at the poles and wider at the equator), the gravity is different at different latitudes.

 

And the rotation is not exactly 24 hours, and it has changed in history.

 

But you're right that the speed of light doesn't change, in vacuum.

 

How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable?

How come we don't have a unified field theory, and why is it that Newton's laws only apply up to 1/3rd of the speed of light? And why is it that relativity theory is accurate in super-quantum level but not on quantum level? And much more…

 

We don't know all the laws of nature yet. And some scientists postulate that the laws of nature are so complex that we will never understand them. It seems like they all fall into a form of ordered chaos.

[Guest Spinoza]

Re: Even so, didn't Spinoza define (and prove) God without the Bible and without the Jewish faith? So why does the Old Testament somehow prove Spinoza's God?

 

 

True, Spinoza proved without a doubt that "God" exists. on the very 1dst page of The Ethocs. So that is One Proof without the Bible.

 

The Second Proof is the one I noted in Deut 7:6-7

 

So now you have 2 separately sourced Proofs.

 

As someone earlier suggested on here I think that Jesus original message was the same as Spinoza's God/Nature....

The Kingdom of God is like a mustard Seed, the wheat, yeast, the hidden treasure (within everything) the net,....

 

But Jesus best description of the Kingdom of God is found in Luke 17:21 "The Kingdom of God is WITHIN YOU. Within You... not in the midst, not amongst (but those also) but WITHIN YOU. http://www.The-Kingdom-of-God-is-Within-You.blogspot.com

 

-------------------------

All you need is Love.

[Ouroboros]

To The Stranger,

 

Here's a link to a Christian website where they argue the Old Earth: http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/ageofuniverse.html (because the Bible says the mountains are ancient).

 

The age of the universe and other FAQs at UCLA: http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/age.html

FAQ: http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html

 

Age of the universe explained on Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe

 

Age of Earth on Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_earth

 

The evidence is overwhelming. The arguments from those who do not believe in the old age have mostly specious and dubious arguments.

 

The truth is, I don't believe in your religion because of the evidence against it. You are the one choosing to refuse to see the truth. You're the one who needs to open his eyes to reality.

[Guest Spinoza]

I agree with Einstein, Spinoza, Jesus (Gospel of Thomas, Luke 17:21) and Black Elk's understanding of the Great Spirit, God/Nature ... whatever you want to call it.

 

"The first peace, which is the most important, is that which comes from within the souls of people when they realize their relationship,

their oneness with the universe and all its powers, and when they realize that at the centre of the universe, dwells the Great Spirit,

and that this centre is really everywhere, it is within each of us." - Black Elk

[Guest ephymeris]

If none of you choose to believe, that is our freedom and right, but the Christians faith is not a blind faith by any stretch of the emangination.

 

 

Stranger, I think Ouroboros has done a fine job pointing out how your poor understanding of how the universe works really limits your ability to argue for your god. It's the quotes such as the one above I have a problem with. You keep saying we apostates do not choose to believe and that chaps my ass. We can not choose to believe anything that does not make sense. The quickest way to make this point is to challenge you to truly believe in pixies, Santa Claus, or trolls. Ok, GO! Didn't work did it? It's really offensive to me that you think this is a failure on our part to believe when we've put so much more effort and thought into our current points of view than most christians.

[★ Citsonga ★]

For those who will believe in Christ, we will see the evidence quite clearly.

 

For those who do not want to believe in God, there will always be reason to doubt.

 

Don't assume that atheists simply don't want to believe in god, nor that nonbelievers just don't want to believe. For many of us, nothing could be further from the truth. I was a very, very devout christian for years, and I did NOT want to stop believing; it just got to the point where the evidence mounting against christianity was insurmountable, and I had no choice but to stop believing.

 

What my intent here will be is to show that there is scientific reason to believe in God and of a young earth.

 

I used to do the same thing. The problem is that christian creationism is based on the faulty assumption that the bible is the perfect word of god and everything must be made to fit with what the bible says. In other words, they start with the conclusion and then manipulate the details to try to make them seem to support the preconceived conclusion. Science, on the other hand, is about starting with the evidence and then drawing conclusions from that evidence. Thus, creationism is not science, it's dogma. Dogma that I used to believe, but dogma nonetheless.

 

I want to start out by showing you reason #1 that one could have to doubt evolution and support creation.

 

 

Did Darwin become a Christian on his deathbed?

 

My linkhttp://carm.org/secular-movements/evolution/did-darwin-become-christian-his-deathbed

 

 

This site gives clear indications that this is a true statement. If so, the very foundings of the theory is then in question, as the founder seems to make it known that he was wrong and wanted Christ preached to the world.

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG001.html

 

The following link shows clearly that the creation side of things is not only rejected, though showing proof of evidence, but not even allowed to have a fair review. If evolution is so true, why is there a fear of open reviews and/or debates?

 

My link

 

It's NOT a fear of creationism, but a devotion to the facts. Creationism is not science, it's dogma. Creationists don't care about going where the evidence leads, they only care about manipulating the evidence to try to force it into their preconceived mold.

 

If there was a movement to challenge the theory of gravity, should it be allowed equal hearing to the theory of gravity? Of course not, because the evidence for gravity is overwhelming, regardless of how some could find a way to twist the details to try to make it seem like gravity isn't true. You see, it's about EVIDENCE.

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA040.html

 

You know, Stranger, you remind me a lot of my former self. You seem sincere and fully convinced that "true science" supports the bible. However, biblical creationism is a manipulation based on the faulty assumption that the bible is perfect. It has no real evidence, it just has blind faith in the bible. Once I found out that the bible is FAR from perfect and CANNOT be the word of god, I realized how misplaced my trust in it was. No longer having to force everything to fit the bible, I was able to recognize that there was no reason to demonize those who were simply going where the evidence leads.

 

Creationism has no place in science curriculum because it is NOT science, NOT because evolutionists are somehow afraid of it.

[★ Citsonga ★]

If none of you choose to believe, that is our freedom and right, but the Christians faith is not a blind faith by any stretch of the emangination.

 

 

Stranger, I think Ouroboros has done a fine job pointing out how your poor understanding of how the universe works really limits your ability to argue for your god. It's the quotes such as the one above I have a problem with. You keep saying we apostates do not choose to believe and that chaps my ass. We can not choose to believe anything that does not make sense. The quickest way to make this point is to challenge you to truly believe in pixies, Santa Claus, or trolls. Ok, GO! Didn't work did it? It's really offensive to me that you think this is a failure on our part to believe when we've put so much more effort and thought into our current points of view than most christians.

 

Exactly! I didn't choose to stop believing, I just couldn't deny the overwhelming evidence I saw mounting against it. With all my close relatives and friends being believers, there's no way in hell I would have chosen to reject it. Losing my faith was not an easy process at all, and I would have gladly retained my faith if I could have. But I couldn't, plain and simple.

 

All this "choose" talk that christians use is based on their indoctrination that we're supposed to "choose christ," and that some "choose" to reject christ. While I can't say that there aren't those who technically believe the christian message but choose to not follow it, for many, MANY of us that's simply NOT the case. We don't choose to reject christ any more than we choose to reject santa; we simply come to the realization that it's a fairy tale, that's all.

 

The christian faith IS a blind faith, and that's no stretch of the imagination.

[Antlerman]

 

Jesus weeps.

 

This is the fruit of your "study"?