CREATIONISM----F.Y.I (page 2)

Xander

A single deity in control with an absolute and perfect agenda is central to my faith.

Yes, but why?

How have you come to conclude their is a single deity in control with an 'absolute and perfect agenda'? What criteria have you used to determine this is true enough for you to base your entire understanding of life around?

nakedmvistar

FAITH [noun:] 1A. Trust. 2A. Belief in GOD 2. Loyalty.

I have faith in God...Where did it come from? How did I reach This conclusion? There is no Scientific answer to this one. My family became involved in the JWs when I was about 10yrs old. Before then God was never mentioned at all. I on the other hand, always had a fascination with the idea of a omnipresent everlasting creator ever since I found a bible (ASV) in an old box being thrown out by my neighbor. I came to have read it several times before i was about eight. Even before this I just had a "feeling" of something greater. Wish I could explain it more thoroughly. It has driven me ever since. I can't rationalize my belief. It's internal. I don't need tanglible proof. It's a belief...A trust in something that was only internalized after I read the bible. Could it have been any other god? Maybe. But this one makes the most sense to me out of all that I have researched. Now that my faith is solidified, I find myself, like anyone else in the same situation i'm sure, quite biased in my conclusions when it comes to creationism or anything pertaining to God. There is a point where your Faith in God, the God, transcends all logic and you come to admit to yourself that your not in control....That you can't and don't posses all the answers. That's where your gamble to believe takes over. Maybe that Particle of faith, to believe in and put a faith in something greater than ourselves is not present in everyone. it becomes something beyond any MEASURED reason. Maybe it's something that not all posses. Could it be a innate skill only assigned to a few? I don't know.

Perry

Do not strict evolutionists require an infinite digression of cause and effect events to explain the processes of life and matter? And if that is so, does that also not require faith since that postulate is far beyond examination using the scientific method?

Why many fail to see the eventual convergence of similarity comparing one infinite with another infinite is beyond me. Some simply chose an intelligent "infinite" explanation and others simply choose an unintelligent, random one to explain the uniqueness of being.

For me, it really reveals more of a political, moral, and philosophical motive when one is "factualized" to the dogmatic exclusion of the other.

Liberty

Hi Perry,

Evolutionists "require" nothing because science isn't trying to do anything but come up with viable explainations for phenomenon based upon evidence observed in the natural world. Because they are not trying to appease an invisible super being there is no implicit pressure which "requires" an authorized conclusion. Despite the attempt by Creationists to equate science with faith based religion, science is NOT based on faith, it is based on evidence. The sciences, including evolutionary science, do NOT claim to have an ultimate Truth they are trying to prove, unlike religion, but are merely allowing truths about the natural world to be revealed and then formulated into viable explanations known as paradigms, which are models of how something might work using the best available evidence. Paradigms are not dogmatic beliefs held as Truth approved by a super being authority figure who punishes you if you get it wrong so they in NO way resemble religions. Scientists or even laymen who refuse to accept prevailent paradigms are not persecuted or threatened with punishments, they are merely asked to provide evidence which will over turn the prevailent paradigm in favor of their new one. This happens all the time, one huge paradigm shift occurred when Geology accepted the Shifting Tectonic Plates paradigm to replace the Steady State model. Science is always changing based on the evidence while religions resist change because it calls into question their central authority. No such central authority exists for science.

Crazy151drinker

but I can't justify the diversity, hardness of life in general, and cruelty in the animal world with a single, all powerful, unified and loving creator.

Maybe God is having a bad day?

Crazy151drinker

Well, Im still waiting to see the Big Bang. Can someone please tell me what started the Big Bang or what was before it????

I fail to see why people take Genesis and the Bible so literally when it was written thousands of years ago. How is God going to explain DNA to the Isrealites? The Periodic Table? Whats that??? Telescopes, Gravity, Quantem Mechanics????? The Isrealites didnt have a clue when it came to Science and Technologoy so obviously they are not going to write about it in the Bible. To say, its not in the Bible so it must not exist is pure IGNORANCE. Science in no way Disproves the existence of God, and the Bible in no way Disproves Science. Why cant people just accept that the stuff we know about today was not understood back then??? Thats why its not in there! HELLO! If the Bible was written today, it would have DNA and all kinds of Goodies in it! Here also lies the problem with the TWO WITNESS ~~escuse~~ rule, at the time it made sense because of the technological limitations (or lack there of) of forensics. Back THEN, the only way you could prove something was if someone witnessed it. But TODAY IN THE REAL WORLD we have scientific ways to proof things without a WITNESS. Once again, a classic example of the WT missusing the Bible in order to keep their CULT inline.

Xander

1) The bible says everything was created in seven days. SEVEN DAYS!! Okay, so maybe if there was a divine being responsible for its authorship, early man would not have understood the physics and biology involved. Couldn't 'god' just say 'it took a really long time'? Why say 'seven days', which is ridiculous? It isn't true in any definition of 'day', unless you define each day to be 'some incredibly long amount of time that is indeterminate', but then how do you know there were exactly 7 of these lengths of time? Why say '7' at all? Especially 'days', which early man could only interpret one way.

Now, if the bible was a book a fables by ancient men, you can easily see where 7 days came from. Their 'god' is all-powerful and miraculous - OF COURSE it only took 7 days to make the earth! Pfah!

2) And the flood, how about that? Bible says it covered the entire earth. Now, today, we know that can't possibly be true, so you try to explain away 'well, they really meant the earth as it was known then', etc.

Which isn't what the bible said. It says 'the entire earth' - and not just the entire earth, no indeed, god says in Gen 6 that he will, in fact, destroy every single thing he created with this flood. Yes, that's another statement it makes that modern science knows can't possibly be true, so it has to be explained away.

There are a few more, but the point is that the bible makes many statements that, if you believe it was inspired by god, there are problems with. Specifically, they can't be true as they were written.

In any case, here's an interesting link for those willing to think for themselves:

192 Biblical ErrorsThese actually present much greater detail than I have above, and are quite an interesting read.

Edited by - Xander on 20 September 2002 13:3:47

Xander

I should elaborate: the above is a link to 192 articles dealing with biblical errors - there are many, many more than 192.

Crazy151drinker

7 days was a good round number!

Do you think Moses would have understood the formation of Stars? Blackholes? Any of Einstiens theories?? Of course not! So God dumbed it down for everyone until they could catch up. The Flood? Well mabye there was a flood that flooded everything that THEY could see for 40 days. There 'world' was quite small. Is it the black sea that is part salt/freshwater?? I dont remember but one of those seas in the middleeast was flooded by seawater and it destroyed tons of villages on stuff. Either way, just because their 'world' was flooded doesnt mean it was the entire world. But to the writers it was, so thus we have the whole world flooded. We are talking about a pretty primitive civilization here! So what if there are some errors! Lets see you write a book on space travel and see how right you are in 4000 years.

CREATIONISM----F.Y.I

Share this