Church Sex Scandal [Archive] - AbsolutePunk.net

bossydacow

08/08/03, 07:48 PM

The sex scandal is tricky situation. ON one hand I think that the media has bown in out of proportion, and on the other hand I think that the CHurch deserves all th e negative publicity because we are supposed to trust the preists with out deepest secrets and sins, and look to them as role models and pathways wto God, and because of all the abuse and cover ups,the Church heirarchy has betrayed us.
My best friend 's brother is in the seminary, and he says the abusive behavior stems from immoral teachings bacvk in the 40's-60's. Especially during teh hippie years when free love was being preached all over the place. He says that preist were taught that it was okay for them to indulge in masturbation,and I guess the preists took it further and started absuingchildingren. WHich is sick as hell.
Sorry this is so poorly written,I'm in a hotel room in chicago and I'm usig the tv/internet system.

yeat182

08/08/03, 10:48 PM

Originally posted by Ronin
What do you think of it?

Is it blown out of proportion by the media, or is it a problem with the core of the Catholic church? What should be done about it?

A prof told us that the incidence of child molestation by priests is no higher than that in the general public. The problem arises because

a) a priest is expected to uphold certain moral values moreso than the general public. And please, nobody compare this to Clinton getting a blowjob, because I really don't think the two situations equate.

b) The church has covered up some (many) of the incidents

Anyways, we need a new topic. I expect bossydacow to give us some insight, as she's the coolest Catholic on the board (besides me).

And no, my priest didn't molest me. Perhaps because I didn't go to church (j/k)

as someone who lives near Boston, i will tell you that it is a huge issue here, everyone is very upset at the church, especially for knowing about the incidents and doing little, if anything about it. I think the church should be held criminally responsible for many of the incidents because they had the knowledge of what was happening and did nothing to stop it. On a moral level, how can you listen to someone tell you not to sin or you'll go to hell, when in the back of your mind you're worried that he's fondling your little boy when his at sunday school? I'm no catholic, and i think the church is more about power of people, than truley practing peace and love and all that, but when it comes to this, they deserve to be punished severely, there are hundreds if not thousands of cases of this, and it has gone on for decades.....i just wonder what kind of "god" would let something like this happen in the very organization dedicated to him?

BrandNewDream

08/08/03, 11:43 PM

Originally posted by yeat182
as someone who lives near Boston, i will tell you that it is a huge issue here, everyone is very upset at the church, especially for knowing about the incidents and doing little, if anything about it. I think the church should be held criminally responsible for many of the incidents because they had the knowledge of what was happening and did nothing to stop it. On a moral level, how can you listen to someone tell you not to sin or you'll go to hell, when in the back of your mind you're worried that he's fondling your little boy when his at sunday school? I'm no catholic, and i think the church is more about power of people, than truley practing peace and love and all that, but when it comes to this, they deserve to be punished severely, there are hundreds if not thousands of cases of this, and it has gone on for decades.....i just wonder what kind of "god" would let something like this happen in the very organization dedicated to him?

I agree...this is partyl why i don't associate with any religious group, and highly doubt that there is a god.

.&$

08/09/03, 09:30 AM

a priest and a youth minister have been arrested from my church in the past 2 years for child molestation(ironically, the priests name was Father Hands, no joke). i think it is terrible and disgusting that the church covered up these heinous acts, and possibly even condoned them. the whole situation has made me stop going to my church, because i cant in my right mind sit and pray to god inthe same place where children and teens were being abused.

Matthew

08/09/03, 09:34 AM

The child molestation scandals are just another example of the iron-willed Catholic church refusing to accept reality. Rather than admit they need reform, they choose to play these stupid games of pride and decpetion (thats a commandment and a deadly sin right there, for those keeping socre at home).

chubb9

08/09/03, 01:11 PM

I think theres a bias against the Catholic Church. Yes, HORRIBLE things have happened within it recently and I'm not trying to minimize that. But the media tries to discredit the whole church because of a few people. The estimated number of priests that have been involved in this behavior is 2-5% at best. I also point out, that that number jumps to close to 8% in the general adult public. Once again, horrible things have happened and I'd like to see every priest that was involved go to jail and get his, but don't use them to cast suspicion on the entire church.
And the media is so quick to make it seem like the whole church is bad, all the priests are molesters. So quick to denounce the church. This same media then, after 9/11 when 19 Muslims ran planes into our buildings, were so quick to point out that not all Muslims are like those on the militant fringe. Why the double standard? Because the media is more hostile to those of the Catholic Church.
Thats just how i see it.

BrandNewDream

08/09/03, 01:36 PM

Originally posted by chubb9
But the media tries to discredit the whole church because of a few people. The estimated number of priests that have been involved in this behavior is 2-5% at best. I also point out, that that number jumps to close to 8% in the general adult public. Once again, horrible things have happened and I'd like to see every priest that was involved go to jail and get his, but don't use them to cast suspicion on the entire church.

They're quick to jump out at the church because the church isn't doing enough about these priests. I too, agree with that feeling.

yeat182

08/09/03, 08:34 PM

Originally posted by chubb9
I think theres a bias against the Catholic Church. Yes, HORRIBLE things have happened within it recently and I'm not trying to minimize that. But the media tries to discredit the whole church because of a few people. The estimated number of priests that have been involved in this behavior is 2-5% at best. I also point out, that that number jumps to close to 8% in the general adult public. Once again, horrible things have happened and I'd like to see every priest that was involved go to jail and get his, but don't use them to cast suspicion on the entire church.
And the media is so quick to make it seem like the whole church is bad, all the priests are molesters. So quick to denounce the church. This same media then, after 9/11 when 19 Muslims ran planes into our buildings, were so quick to point out that not all Muslims are like those on the militant fringe. Why the double standard? Because the media is more hostile to those of the Catholic Church.
Thats just how i see it.

the point is that everyone in a postition of power in the church new about these acts, and did nothing to stop them, and usually just swept it under the rug and let it keep happening...in that regard the whole church should be discredited. the media isn't claiming all priests are molesters, but they are asking why did those in charge allow it to happen over, and over, and over again...?

bossydacow

08/09/03, 08:59 PM

I think its important in this situation to 1) not blame God. He gave us free will, the preists actions are their own, and 2) remember to seperate the actions and apathy of those involved in the scandal, from the true teachings of Catholicism. It is a religion of peace and love. Those preists who commited those acts, and the people who covered for them were not acting lke true catholics. What they did is highly unacceptable in the catholic religion. What has happened has not ruined my faith in God or the Catholic teaching, and I don't know how it could ruin the faiths of other people. If it does, they never had a true understanding of hte religion. and yeat: they don't tell you your going to hell. Thats not Catholicism.

Overall, I just don't want to see my religion, the religion that is the basis of life for my family, friends, and so many other honest, good people that I know, put on trial with the men that have made grave decisions that all truly catholic people would loathe. Catholicism doens't deserve that.

yeat182

08/09/03, 10:40 PM

it was done in the name of god and if he is all that he is cracked up to be he could have prevented it...those kids didn't have a choice in the matter, no matter how much free will god gave them.

and also, the catholic church has an enourmously long list of scandal dating back to its very creation, which was in essence a means to control the population and get wealthy quickly. it is no more that the equivilant to the old traveling medicine shows that claim to have miracle cures for only a few bucks...

bossydacow

08/11/03, 06:11 AM

Originally posted by yeat182
it was done in the name of god and if he is all that he is cracked up to be he could have prevented it...those kids didn't have a choice in the matter, no matter how much free will god gave them.

and also, the catholic church has an enourmously long list of scandal dating back to its very creation, which was in essence a means to control the population and get wealthy quickly. it is no more that the equivilant to the old traveling medicine shows that claim to have miracle cures for only a few bucks...

If God prevented every disaster/tragedy/injustice than we wouldn't have free will. We'd be puppets and our entire purpose for being would be irrelevent. God, for the most part, will not prevent bad things from happening, but He will be there to help you through it, if you let Him.

and yes, there have been a lot of scandals in the Church's history, but many of those happened centuries ago. Catholicism is different, especially after the Vatican II. The Pope has recognized the misdeeds of the Church in the past, and has officially apologized for them and is working to counter the results of the scandals through humanatarian efforts.

yeat182

08/11/03, 08:11 AM

so the explain this to me:

let's assume that there is a god. and lets assume that a couple of hundred years from now, mankind creates a weapon so powerful it will destroy the universe. every atom, every moon, every planet, every star...everything will be destroyed....including god. would god let that happen? he gave us free will, so would he interefere to save himself or the rest of the universe? So if god interefers then there is no such thing as free will, and if he does nothing, there cannot be a god, because a god is omnipotent and cannot be destroyed...so that leaves us with a god that would have to interefere and therefor, there is no free will...so why does he not interefere when it comes to child molestation in the catholic church?

bossydacow

08/11/03, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by yeat182
so the explain this to me:

let's assume that there is a god. and lets assume that a couple of hundred years from now, mankind creates a weapon so powerful it will destroy the universe. every atom, every moon, every planet, every star...everything will be destroyed....including god. would god let that happen? he gave us free will, so would he interefere to save himself or the rest of the universe? So if god interefers then there is no such thing as free will, and if he does nothing, there cannot be a god, because a god is omnipotent and cannot be destroyed...so that leaves us with a god that would have to interefere and therefor, there is no free will...so why does he not interefere when it comes to child molestation in the catholic church?

you are describing something that, if it happened, would most likely be the final battle of Earth, thus signifying the end of the world and the second coming of Christ (Matthew 24:30 "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.").
The dead will rise, we will fight with Jesus, and as the book of Revelations says, we will win because good triumphs over evil. This will be the end of our world we know (earth, space, and the rules of our society), but our souls will endure. People die, souls live on. After the end of the world, we live in everlasting happiness with God.
Child molestation does not signify the end of the world.

yeat182

08/11/03, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by bossydacow
you are describing something that, if it happened, would most likely be the final battle of Earth, thus signifying the end of the world and the second coming of Christ (Matthew 24:30 "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.").
The dead will rise, we will fight with Jesus, and as the book of Revelations says, we will win because good triumphs over evil. This will be the end of our world we know (earth, space, and the rules of our society), but our souls will endure. People die, souls live on. After the end of the world, we live in everlasting happiness with God.
Child molestation does not signify the end of the world.

where would chirst "come" to? the universe is destroyed. that includes god. there is nothing outside the universe, that is the very definition of universe.

and i thought jesus was all about peace? why is suddenly fighting?

bossydacow

08/11/03, 09:17 AM

Originally posted by yeat182
where would chirst "come" to? the universe is destroyed. that includes god. there is nothing outside the universe, that is the very definition of universe.

and i thought jesus was all about peace? why is suddenly fighting?

Christ comes before the universe is destroyed. He returns to Jerusalem. And, the universe, as we know it, will be destroyed. However, there will be another land, where we will all live together in peace.

and, gee...fight against the devil. Evil in pure form. It is intolerable to tolerate intolerance. The devil is intolerance. And for all we know the way Jesus fights is non-violet. We don't know. The Book of Revelations is highly metaphorical and very hard to understand, it speaks of blazing pools of fires ect, but should not be taken literally. However, its overall message speaks the truth. But what we do know is that there will be a battle of some form, and Good will win.

yeat182

08/11/03, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by bossydacow

and, gee...fight against the devil. Evil in pure form. It is intolerable to tolerate intolerance. The devil is intolerance. And for all we know the way Jesus fights is non-violet. We don't know. The Book of Revelations is highly metaphorical and very hard to understand, it speaks of blazing pools of fires ect, but should not be taken literally. However, its overall message speaks the truth. But what we do know is that there will be a battle of some form, and Good will win.

why doesn't jesus come back and battle the perverted priests and bishops? i guess he can tolerate a little evil...

also, the book of revelations is highly metaphorical, it also speaks of an all powerful god that loves eveyone yet at the same time spites those that do not belive in him....fiction at its best.

yeat182

08/11/03, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
Hey I know you dont believe in God, but you should try reading "Left Behind" or watch the movie of it. You can get it at Blockbuster. It explains how the end of the world starts and then other books after that describe even more. If you don't believe the story then at nothing else you still get a good ficition story.

i worked i a video store for 3 years and i saw that movie...kirk cameron...it was mildly entertaining... i would have to give customers a disclaimer when they tried to rent it, and tell them it was made by a religious organization and isn't the action flick they were expecting.

bossydacow

08/11/03, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by yeat182
why doesn't jesus come back and battle the perverted priests and bishops? i guess he can tolerate a little evil...

also, the book of revelations is highly metaphorical, it also speaks of an all powerful god that loves eveyone yet at the same time spites those that do not belive in him....fiction at its best.

Jesus will fight all evil when he returns. All the evil, and the evil acts, that has existed since the beginning of time will be vanquished.

The metaphorical parts of the Book of Revelations are the battle imageries. The meaning behind the metaphors, which essentially is that Good will triumph over evil and we will live forever in peace with God, is whats important.

By "those who don't believe in him, God will spite...", the book is referring to something much more complex than the general meaning of that phrase. They are speaking of those who are inherently evil --- I believe very few of people have existed that are so. Ideally, God will not have to spite anyone . But look at it this way, do your parents punish you when you are misbehaving ( i know you are older, so maybe when you were a child?"). Mine did. and it was because they loved me. God will spite wrong doers, punish them, because he loves them. And he loves us, and wants to protect us from souls that will try to harm us. Remember, these people are the ultimate wrong doers.

And there is also purgatory. Some believe that rather than hell, wrong doers and non believers will be in limbo until they come to terms with their sins and recognize God. Only then will they have a place in heaven-- but they certainly wouldn't spend anytime in Hell. So, overall, I'd say very few people are damned by God, and, actually, technically they damned themselves by refusing to recognize God, even when they witnessed the Second Coming of Christ.

yeat182

08/11/03, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by bossydacow
Jesus will fight all evil when he returns. All the evil, and the evil acts, that has existed since the beginning of time will be vanquished.

The metaphorical parts of the Book of Revelations are the battle imageries. The meaning behind the metaphors, which essentially is that Good will triumph over evil and we will live forever in peace with God, is whats important.

By "those who don't believe in him, God will spite...", the book is referring to something much more complex than the general meaning of that phrase. They are speaking of those who are inherently evil --- I believe very few of people have existed that are so. Ideally, God will not have to spite anyone . But look at it this way, do your parents punish you when you are misbehaving ( i know you are older, so maybe when you were a child?"). Mine did. and it was because they loved me. God will spite wrong doers, punish them, because he loves them. And he loves us, and wants to protect us from souls that will try to harm us. Remember, these people are the ultimate wrong doers.

And there is also purgatory. Some believe that rather than hell, wrong doers and non believers will be in limbo until they come to terms with their sins and recognize God. Only then will they have a place in heaven-- but they certainly wouldn't spend anytime in Hell. So, overall, I'd say very few people are damned by God, and, actually, technically they damned themselves by refusing to recognize God, even when they witnessed the Second Coming of Christ.

won't most evil doers be long since dead when all this happens? how is jesus gonna fight them? are they going to be zombies that rise from their graves?

bossydacow

08/11/03, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by yeat182
won't most evil doers be long since dead when all this happens? how is jesus gonna fight them? are they going to be zombies that rise from their graves?

evil doers will always exist so long as the Devil does. As for dead evil doers --- their bodies are gone, but their souls live on. So, technically they are alive, they just arn't in corporal form. And if you are wondering how Jesus can fight something non-corporal, well, Jesus is part of the Holy Trinity...he's God, and he can do whatever he wants. With Him, anything is possible.

yeat182

08/11/03, 03:35 PM

wait, jesus is god? i thought he was the son of god...

bossydacow

08/11/03, 08:49 PM

God is often referred to in 3 parts, The Holy Trinity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Essentially, God put himself in human form, blessing The Virgin Mary with immaculate conception, and was born Jesus.
This may seem confusing to you, but The Father (God in pure form), the Son ( Jesus, who as a human form of God unnatural powers, yet also had human weaknesses), the Holy Spirit ( God's characteristics embodied into one being) are three consciencenesses, each who have their own will, placed into one form, God. The Father is the Creator, The Son is the Redeemer, and the Holy Spirit is the sanctifier. Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God. God is God.

yeat182

08/11/03, 09:28 PM

so would it be possible for all 3 "gods" to disagree with each other?

bossydacow

08/12/03, 08:02 AM

Originally posted by yeat182
so would it be possible for all 3 "gods" to disagree with each other?

It is unlikely that the Father and the Holy Spirit would disagree with each other; the Holy Spirit is Wisdom, and the Father is God in pure form, and therefore infinetly Good.
However, with the Son (Jesus), while he was living on earth, it was possible. He had human limitations. Before he was arrested and sentenced to death he prayed three times in a garden, saying, ""If it be possible, let this cup pass from me", but finally, "Nevertheless not my will, but Thine, be done." And later, when he was dying on the cross, he again questioned the Father:

"And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46)

so yes, Jesus, in his last hours, asked if things could go another way. But, in the end, he accepted his destiny. He never really disobeyed his Father's will though. He even asked God to forgive his killers as well as the people who were jeering as they watched him die. And he also reassured the two men who were being crucified next to Him, that they would be saved.
However, now that Jesus is no longer human, he no longer has those weakness. Now the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist together in harmony ---they all share the same everlasting purpose, so disagreements would be unlikely.

Charlito Cafe

08/12/03, 10:19 AM

Yeat ,you're obviously way out of your league here.

As for the question of free will, I've adopted a deist view that "God"(not really the traditional one that most people belive in) created the universe and then just let it run by itself. I don't think it interferes or cares if we worship it or not.

yeat182

08/12/03, 11:22 AM

that makes more sense than a magical being that exists as 3 different beings, that spites those that do not agree with him and only helps those that do shit for him....not that i totally believe what you are saying, but it is more plausable than any typical religious belief.

Matthew

08/12/03, 11:37 AM

bossydacow, i have to say, your knowledge of the scriptures is impressive. i wish more people actually understood what they are saying when they claim a religion. then we wouldnt have so many problems.

yeat182

08/12/03, 11:56 AM

yeah, bossy, i just want to let you know that i wasn't trying to be a dick, it just facinates me that people truley belive in god and i just have a lot of questions about why, and you obviously know your stuff so i enjoy throwing stuff out to see what you say, and you usually make very good points.

Just so you know i would be the kid in sunday school that would drive his teacher crazy asking a thousand questions about god/jesus/etc.

bossydacow

08/12/03, 05:24 PM

Charlito - Have you ever read "Conversations with God" ? The God you speak of is similar to the God who is talking in that book. I haven't read the whole book, but what I did read was interesting.

Matthew - ...yeah, thats what 9 years of Catholic school , and three years of Sunday school to make for early years in public school will do for you . Those religious teachers just keep pounding it into our brains...

Yeat - Just so you know, I never thought you were being a dick. I find it fascinating that people don't believe in a God. I liked your questions, they gave me insight to the athiest mind. And as for the 3 beings in one God belief --- Christains don't call it "the mystery of the Holy Trinity" for nothing. Fully understanding is not humanly possible (or it is thought to be not).

depthsofdreams

08/12/03, 11:54 PM

To bossydacow...just reading this post has made me better informed about my religion. I just kind of brushed it off before, but your quotes from the scriptures are good stuff there.

wrongway

08/13/03, 10:51 AM

good job bossy.... very nice explanation. i've been thru nine years of catholic schol as well, and you definitely know your religion. too bad so many people just brush the idea of a higher power off...

Charlito Cafe

08/13/03, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by bossydacow
Charlito - Have you ever read "Conversations with God" ? The God you speak of is similar to the God who is talking in that book. I haven't read the whole book, but what I did read was interesting.

No, but I guy I met at camp this summer was reading it. I picked up most of knowledge of deism when we studied the founding fathers. Most of the great thinkers in the rationalist era held deist beliefs while claiming to belong to the Anglican or other Protestant churches. Thomas Paine actually wrote a book explaining the concept of deism which most Americans at that time interpreted as atheism and he was ostracized and died in exile, and was largely frowned upon for his beliefs, even though he was considered a hero during the time of the American Revolution.

yeat182

08/13/03, 12:49 PM

Originally posted by wrongway
good job bossy.... very nice explanation. i've been thru nine years of catholic schol as well, and you definitely know your religion. too bad so many people just brush the idea of a higher power off...

it isn't that people brush it off, its that there is absolutley ZERO evidence to support it....

bossydacow

08/13/03, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by yeat182
it isn't that people brush it off, its that there is absolutley ZERO evidence to support it....

I certainly don't want to open up another can of worms, but where do you think the very first speck of the universe came from?

lollirot

08/13/03, 04:29 PM

Uh oh.

Ronin

08/13/03, 06:01 PM

^ post here more often
not because i'm against all religion or anything, just because we need more well-spoken people

NOFXdesendents5

08/13/03, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by Ronin
^ post here more often
not because i'm against all religion or anything, just because we need more well-spoken people

He left here like 2 months before you joined.

bossydacow

08/13/03, 08:40 PM

Originally posted by dep_rules

all that aside, i can say "that speck was just there" and thats just as valid as you saying "well god was just there"

this guy says it better than I can: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3791.asp

yeat182

08/13/03, 11:11 PM

Originally posted by bossydacow
I certainly don't want to open up another can of worms, but where do you think the very first speck of the universe came from?

where do you think god came from?

also, i have no problem saying that i don't know where the first speck came from, or that there even was a first speck, but most religious people can't bring themselves to say that there may not be a god or that they don't know if he exists or not.

edit: i have just read dep's arguement and i agree with him

bossydacow

08/14/03, 04:12 AM

I can't speak for everyone, but I know that I have tried to not believe in a God, as well as tried not to believe that Jesus is the Son of God. It didn't work, and to be honest, I don't understand how someone could not believe in any type of God (or higher power) whatsoever; I don't understand how people cannot think that someone created this world.

Christians believe that "God just is", because we recognize that at some point in the history of the Universe, something had to just be. When I was in the fourth grade, this 5th grader in my car pool told me he didn't believe in God (to which I was horrified, he was the first person I encountered who didn't), and from that began a 45 minute interrogation which went like:

Me: If there is no God, where did ______ come from?
Kid: some answer
Me: and where did that come from?
Kid: some answer
Me: and where did that come from?
Kid: some answer

we didn't have enough time to make it all the way down to the very first speck of the universe, but as the kid got out of the car when we reached his house, our driver guy told him that he would have never won this argument. And the driver guy was right, because the point I was trying to make to this kid was that eventually, we would have gotten down to some point where something had to have just "always been."

and once you understand that something must have "always been", you could just say that that something was a little speck of matter that evolved and evolved and evolved, then somewhere a long the line there happened to be a big bang and --- hey now!--- we have a universe! But, If you look at it in one of these two ways, I think, that there is a good case for some sort of god/higher power to have existed and who created this universe:

These are both popular ways to explain why we think a god exists,

a.) The clock comparison --- "If you found a clock and examined the mechanism within it, you would probably think that this intricate mechanism was not the outcome of mere chance, that it had been designed.

Now look at the universe; is it possible that such an intricate mechanism, from the orbits of planets round the sun to the cells in your fingernails could all have happened by chance? Surely, this enormously complex mechanism has been designed, and the being that designed it must be God. "

b.) The calligraphy story --- a young man comes to a priest and says he doubts the existence of a creator. Priest takes out a piece of parchment with beautiful black calligraphy written on it. The preist asks what the man thinks of it, and the man says it must have taken the priest a long time to make that. The priest says no: by chance, he forgot to shut the window of his office, and a stray cat wandered in. An open bottle of ink happened to be sitting on on his desk next to some parchmant. The cat jumped on the desk and tipped over the bottle of ink. The ink spilled over the parchmant in such a way that it formed this calligraphy writing.
the young man laughs at this, and asks how the priest can expect him to believe that such an intricate, detailed, and beautiful thing could just "happen" like that and that the priest or someone didn't make it. The priest says, "oh! And you don't think the universe is detailed, intricate and maybe a little beautiful?" The young man understood what the priest was getting at, and went home a believer.

so, in short:

a.) Something had to "just be"
b.) it is illogical to not think this world was created by someone, to think that this all just happened by chance. I think that notion goes against common sense in our society. The universe, the earth, human beings; these things, with all there complexities, don't just result from a chain of events that began with an accidental occurence. They are the product of intricatly woven design.
c.) its obvious to me that some sort of higher power designed this world, but what type of power this thing is, is an entirely different argument.

note: I just want to make it clear that I know the Big Bang really happened. I am a believer of both Creationism and Evolution. Evolution tells us how it happened, Creationism and the Bible tell us why it happened.

yeat182

08/14/03, 08:03 AM

that was very well put, but there is a difference between a "creator" and "god". more than likely something created the universe, but it could be something like a stray atom or electron or something, not the "god" that is depicted in the bible...basically i don't see how a bunch of people 4000 years ago would be able to so easily determine that there is a god when the best scientific minds in the world for the past 2000 years have not been able to. i feel that the bible is a collection of fables and made up stories, and that god was simply a made up component of that story. but that is not to say that something didn't create the universe. i personally believe in science and that science can explain the universe rather than an all powerful being.

i mean, can you honestly say you believe the universe was created in 7 days?

also, i think that it is entirely possible that this whole world, all life and such is a complete accident, there is no reason to assume it was all designed by something because we don't have anything to compare it to, how do we know what a universe should be like? how do we know that these "accidents" don't happen all the time? how do we know that life is too complex to just happen? we have no frame of reference for it. we can't say that, "oh look how universe A is, our universe should be like that, but we're not so we must have been designed by something"

Justin_stacy

08/14/03, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by yeat182

i mean, can you honestly say you believe the universe was created in 7 days?

no one knows how long each of those seven days were.............

yeat182

08/14/03, 08:17 AM

haha, good point.

Justin_stacy

08/14/03, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by dep_rules
well in the bible it says 7 days, which was written by a human. im pretty sure the days 2000 years ago lasted just as long as ours.

"days" is a figure of speach, theres no telling how long the period lasted, hell whos to say the acient people didn't see a day as 4 moring periods and 4 night periods (meaning 4 days in eyes but only 1 in there eyes)........

yeat182

08/14/03, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by Justin_stacy
"days" is a figure of speach, theres no telling how long the period lasted, hell whos to say the acient people didn't see a day as 4 moring periods and 4 night periods (meaning 4 days in eyes but only 1 in there eyes)........

unless "days" is roughly equivilant to millenia, i don't think its acurate.

Ronin

08/14/03, 11:34 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
As far as the Bible being false I would challenge anyone to show 1 thing in the Bible that has been proven not true.

I challenge you to prove 1thing in the bible that's true, other than historical fact (i.e. so and so ruled Rome at such and such a time)

That's the paradox of religion, it can't be proven or disproven

yeat182

08/14/03, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by Ronin
I challenge you to prove 1thing in the bible that's true, other than historical fact (i.e. so and so ruled Rome at such and such a time)

That's the paradox of religion, it can't be proven or disproven

i agree.

there is a flaw in the logic of most religious types, because they say, "well you can't prove it isn't true"

well, you can't prove to me that this beer bottle next to me didn't create the universe in an afternoon, but that doesn't mean its true, and it doesn't mean it should hold any validity.

stupid paradox's.

lollirot

08/14/03, 11:34 PM

Just wondering.. how the fuck did Noah get all those animals onto that boat with him? Out of the gazillions of animal species that existed.. really.. what kinda boat did they build thousands of years ago that didnt break with heavy water? Was it the force of God, then? Well, how could Noah build his ark with gazillions of animals so quickly, thinking that the thing must have been at least the size of Luxemburg or something? Force of God?

:confused: :confused: :confused:

sigh

08/15/03, 12:27 AM

This is my ultimate epiphany: (actually its kind of a paradox)
Since the universe had a beginning and a cause, and that cause was God, God cause was to be the cause of the universe. God was there because the universe was there, and the universe is here because of God. They cannot exist without each other.

Ronin

08/15/03, 04:44 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
Here's one thing. In the old testement which was written between 1450 bc and 450 bc they predicted a messiah would be born, he would perform miracles, and would be crucified.
Flash forward to 400 bc, Jesus was born. He performed miracles that were seen by thousands of people, and the later on was crucified. That's one prediction that came true.

Also in the book of Joshua many historical facts have been proven through archaeology.

I got this one from a website:
The birth of King Cyrus was prophesied by the Lord over one hundred years before he was born. God did this to show mankind that He is God, and there is none like He is. The Lord not only prophesied King Cyrus’ future existence, but also told in great detail what the King would accomplish on the Lord’s behalf during his lifetime. King Cyrus was not a fictional character. His tomb is in the Middle East to this day. Some of the accounts are found in: Isaiah 44:26, 28; 45:1-7, 11, 13-14; 2 Chronicles 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-3 and Daniel 10:1.

Also you have to think the Bible is the most examined book ever, and many people have tried to prove historical facts false in it and havent. That doesnt really prove that it is fact, but prove's it hasnt been discredited.

Like I mentioned in my first post, I'm not going to argue with the historical backgrounds. Political shifts, rulers, nation states, etc etc are all discussed and are mostly historical fact. Even Jesus himself is essentially a historical fact (as far as anyone can tell).

As for eyewitness testimory about Jesus' miracles, we can't take the bible on its word. The New Testament was pieced together years after his death, and only contains second (or even farther removed) hand information.

What I'm saying is that you can't PROVE things such as Adam and Eve, Noah and the Ark, the burning bush, Jesus' miracles, etc etc. Chances are, nobody will ever prove them right or wrong, which is the paradox of the bible.

I'm not bashing religion here, I just think most bible stories are analogies and allegories used to prove a point. I don't think you should take it at face value, and I don't think it was even intended to be taken that way.

bossydacow

08/15/03, 08:14 AM

Adam and Eve arn't real. The Book of Genesis isn't meant to be taken literally. Only fundamentalist take it literally. Like Justin said, we don't know how to measure God's days. And the person who wrote Genesis (thought to be Moses), could have even decided to make the creation of the world 7 days long to simplify things for the reader. Most of the Hebrew Scriptures are made up of oral traditions finally put into print. This means the details of the stories arn't meant to be taken literally, but the overall message is.

and to Yeat's post awhile back:

Wedo have a frame of reference to compare how something very complex can't happen by accident. As a Christian, I assume that a higher power created the world, and all of the human beings. God created EVERYTHING (this means all possible Universes, worlds, people ect). We can't compare Universe A to ours because God created both of those universes. So, we are left to use common sense to examine things that Man has created for Earth. We know that a rocket ship is a complex machine, capable of many functions. We know that a rocket ship didn't just create itself... by the laws of Nature, we know that. Things with such complexity don't just happen. You are essentially arguing that it is plausible that an atom and another atom can just randomly meet and BOOM, complex results come forth. That goes against what we as human beings have come to understand of how the world works.
Now, if you still think it is possible for the Earth and Universe to be created accidently, take a look at human beings. We are, by far, the most complex species. We each have our individual minds, which makes us all existing for a vast number of purposes. Mother Theresa and Saddam Hussien --- two beings, both of the same kind, yet existing(existed) on Earth for completely different reasons. How many differnt purposes can a couple of Rocket Ships have. Yet we recognize that they are complex in creation...that they couldnt possibly have just happened on their own. Why arn't human beings the same?

Charlito Cafe

08/15/03, 08:42 AM

Bossy, very well put back there about why some form of higher power must have created the universe.

Even if we're in disagreement on the nature of that higher power, I applaud you.

About the Bible yeat and whoever else was discussing this, I think it's similar to Greek mythology. Religion is a social tool used for instilling moral beliefs and trying to explain the unknown. I don't think the God talked about in the Bible exists or is the higher power that created the universe.

Ronin

08/15/03, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
Jesus's miracles were seen by thousands and some where still alive when some of the new testement was written.

Also I've read things that show there is scientific evidence that there was a great flood many years ago.

I happen to believe that the Old Testement was true. If you believe the Bible then I dont see how you can't believe it's not true. In the Bible it says, "For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me [in the first five books of the Bible]. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (John 5:45-47) That's Jesus pretty much saying the first 5 books in the Bible are true.

I just find it hard to believe people who know a lot about the Bible dont believe it. I can see people who havent been taught anything about it, but people who know alot? Everything points to the Bible being true. Nothing has been proven false about the Bible and many things have been proven true, or highly probable.

I went to a catholic school, and my religion teacher (who had a degree in religious studies) told us that the bible teaches a lesson, it's not a historical document. Even the pope has come out and accepted evolution (showing Adam and Eve to be untrue).

For the most part, you can't prove the bible true or false, because it teaches moral lessons, which aren't possible to prove empiracally. How do you prove that Jesus was God's son? Do we perform a DNA test? By it's inherent formulation, faith is untestable.

So for a second, let's assume that there is indeed an infallible God working above us. God did not write the bible, people did. People have flaws, biases, etc etc. Some books were written years after the fact, and like I said, it's all second (or third, or fourth) hand information.

Besides, does it really matter if the events are true? If you understand the morals behind them, isn't that was the bible is supposed to teach?

Ronin

08/15/03, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
I agree for the most part you cant prove it true or false, but their are many things in it that are shown to be true, but what has shown to be false? People did write the words down but God was suppose to have inspired the words. Like a secretary taking notes, she doesnt get credit for the report. The person telling her what to write does, because it's still his words.

I know what you're getting at, but I if there is a God, I don't think he/she works in such an obvious way.

"Hey John, take this down...."

"That part about plagues of locusts...a bit much?"

I would say that Adam and Eve has basically been proven false. There's such a volume of evidence demonstrating the validity of evolutionary theory.

yeat182

08/15/03, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by bossydacow
Adam and Eve arn't real. The Book of Genesis isn't meant to be taken literally. Only fundamentalist take it literally. Like Justin said, we don't know how to measure God's days. And the person who wrote Genesis (thought to be Moses), could have even decided to make the creation of the world 7 days long to simplify things for the reader. Most of the Hebrew Scriptures are made up of oral traditions finally put into print. This means the details of the stories arn't meant to be taken literally, but the overall message is.

and to Yeat's post awhile back:

Wedo have a frame of reference to compare how something very complex can't happen by accident. As a Christian, I assume that a higher power created the world, and all of the human beings. God created EVERYTHING (this means all possible Universes, worlds, people ect). We can't compare Universe A to ours because God created both of those universes. So, we are left to use common sense to examine things that Man has created for Earth. We know that a rocket ship is a complex machine, capable of many functions. We know that a rocket ship didn't just create itself... by the laws of Nature, we know that. Things with such complexity don't just happen. You are essentially arguing that it is plausible that an atom and another atom can just randomly meet and BOOM, complex results come forth. That goes against what we as human beings have come to understand of how the world works.
Now, if you still think it is possible for the Earth and Universe to be created accidently, take a look at human beings. We are, by far, the most complex species. We each have our individual minds, which makes us all existing for a vast number of purposes. Mother Theresa and Saddam Hussien --- two beings, both of the same kind, yet existing(existed) on Earth for completely different reasons. How many differnt purposes can a couple of Rocket Ships have. Yet we recognize that they are complex in creation...that they couldnt possibly have just happened on their own. Why arn't human beings the same?

the definition of "universe" though is that it is the only one, and that everything possible is contained within it, including God.

yeat182

08/15/03, 11:36 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
How has it basically been proven false. People claim this all the time and there's nothing to show it was proven or basically proven false. That is what I want someone to show me.

because there is no garden of eden and snakes can't talk....let alone offer you something to eat.

yeat182

08/15/03, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
A virgin cant have a child, and man cant live after death, but if you believe the Bible then yes that did happen.

I dont expect you to explain how the Old Testement is false because you dont accept the other things in the Bible. I would like to see factual evidence of how it is false though.

but doesn't that get back to the whole, "i believe this inanimate carbon rod created the universe, and you can't prove it didn't so ...."

Justin_stacy

08/15/03, 01:01 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
No, cause like i said earlier there is significant evidence that the Bible is true. Jesus was a real person who was crucified, he did miracles that thousands of people witnessed and saw.

cant the same thing be said about evolution............

Justin_stacy

08/15/03, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
yes to a certain extent some evolution has been proven, but alot has been proven false

but its still a more provable theory...........

Justin_stacy

08/15/03, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
explain

what? how we can actually prove that evolution has happened? please tell me you've learned something about it....Hell i live in a state where it isn't even taught and i still (kindof) understand it.....

Ronin

08/15/03, 01:44 PM

Evolution is given weight because of empirical evidence.

How do you explain vestigial organs like the appendix and the tonsils? They serve no function in the current human body, so why would God give us useless structures? The answer is that they're remnants of old structures that were adaptive at the time, showing we've evolved. This is, by the way, the only plausible explanation that's been brought forward, and it's accepted by essentially every scientist.

But that's just hindsight right? We were'nt around a million years ago to watch any species evolve? Well, genetic testing of different species shows how exactly they have evolved from one another, and in what ways. With such biochemical testing, we have empirical, scientific evidence backing evolution. In addition to this, carbon dating of fossils and thorough anthropological studies add more credence to the theory.

But obviously, we can't say that evolution is a fact, because nobody lived to see it. All we can do is examine the current evidence and propose an explanation. The Adam and Eve explanation holds no water anymore, it just doesn't add up (at all). In the same way, you can't say that Jesus definitely performed miracles, because we have no proof. Nobody who is alive today saw these miracles, and there's no footage of them. All we have is 2000 year old second hand information. By the same token, we could argue that Atlantis was a real continent (proven to be false).

Since we're working with the past, you just have to use the most parsimonious explanation. That is, the explanation that requires the least assumptions. Is it possible that God created a man and woman who populated the earth? Unlikely, but there's no way to prove it definitely false.

Ronin

08/15/03, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
As far as vestigal organs go they do serve a purpose. For example the appendix helps fight against cancer, the pineal gland contains hormones the body needs, and the tonsils keep things out of a child's throat.

Also where are the transitional species. You can't go from Monkey to Man without the middle species. Have they found a fully intact transitional specieas? No

No one alive today saw George Washington cross the delaware, but you take that for fact. No one alive today saw Lincoln get shot but thats fact. I know you still say Adam and Eve story hold no water, but why don't they? Explain why they hold no water?

This is directly from my MCAT book on biology

Evidence of Evolution

A. Paleontology

Paleontology, which is the study of the fossil record, is of particular significance to the study of evolution. With the use of radioactive dating techniques, paleontologists are able to determine the age of fossils, thus allowing them to determine the chronological succession of species in the fossil record.

B. Biogeography

Biogeograph refers to the distribution of life forms throughout the globe. Darwin observed that many species found on one of the Galapagos Islands seemed more closely related to species inhabiting the neighbouring mainland than to species inhabiting the other Galapagos islands. The biogeography of the Galapagos suggsts that species migrated from the mainland to neighbouring islands, where the adapted to the different island environments in isolation from each other.

C. Comparative Anatomy

Homologous structures are similar in structure and share a common evolutionary origin. A classic example of homologous structures is found in the forelimbs of mammals: bat wings, whale flippers, horse forelegs, and human arms are all modifications of a common anatomical theme. In contrast, analogous structures share a functional similarity, but arose from different evolutionary origins. The wings of insects and birds are both adaptations for flight, but evolved from seperate lines of descent.
Vestigial structures are remnants of organs that have lost their ancestral functions, and thus are evidence of evolutionary forces at work. Examples include vestiges of limb bones in the adult python, and the appendix and vestiges of the tail bone (coccyx) in man.

D. Comparative Embrology

The stages of embrological development in closely related organisms resemble each other, indicating common evolutionary origins. The earliest stages tend to be the most similar. For example, all chordates exhibit certain features as embryos, such as gills.

E. Molecular Biology

Through comparative DNA studies, biologists have been able to detect similarities in the DNA composition of related species. Taxonomicall close species have a greater percentage of similar DNA than taxonomicall distant species.

Ronin

08/15/03, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
Darwin also discovered Piltdown Man. Which he claimed were a bunch of fossils found somewhere in England. It was suppose to be kind of a half man half ape animal. Scientist looked at them and said that the bones were over 500,000 yrs old, and it was one of the greatest discoveries of all time. Then in the 1950's it was discovered to be a big hoax. The jaw bone found was actually an ape's jaw bone that had died about 50 yrs earlier, and they even filed down the death to make them look less human.

The biggest question to me would be where are the transition species?

"The supposed lack of intermediary forms in the fossil record remains the fundamental canard of current antievolutionism. Such transitional forms are sparse, to be sure, and for two sets of good reasons — geological (the gappiness of the fossil record) and biological (the episodic nature of evolutionary change, including patterns of punctuated equilibrium, and transition within small populations of limited geographic extent). But paleontologists have discovered several superb examples of intermediary forms and sequences, more than enough to convince any fair-minded skeptic about the reality of life’s physical genealogy. "

- Stephen Jay Gould

Some more info here http://www.origins.tv/darwin/transitionals.htm

And the Piltdown Man was discovered by Charles DAWSON, not Charles Darwin (who was long dead). Regardless, science has improved since then, and that's why it was proven to be a hoax...because of science.

Charlito Cafe

08/15/03, 05:12 PM

bossydacow

08/15/03, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by yeat182
the definition of "universe" though is that it is the only one, and that everything possible is contained within it, including God.

I'm not sure what your point is...

and Cal: I'm confused. Are you a fundamentalist?

bossydacow

08/15/03, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
what's your def. of a fundamentalist?

do you take the Bible, and all of its accounts to be literal? do you think that everything that is said in the Bible occured in the exact way in which the Book depicts?

bossydacow

08/15/03, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
Jesus talked in parables so i believe those stories are, but everything else i believe is fact.

Here's my reasoning:
I dont want to pigeon hole the stories in the Bible to determine what was fact or fiction. If you take part of it for fact why would you take the other part for fiction unless it said it was a parable. Who am I or who is anyone else to say what was fiction unless there's obvious proof it's not or it says it is in the Bible, and i have yet to see it prooved other wise.

But hasn't science proved otherwise? And sometimes we don't need science to prove the illogicalness of some of the Bible stories. The Hebrew Scriptures are oral traditions. They might have begun as fact but as they traveled the lands, details were changed. The final telling of the story of Cain and Abel is seriously spun against farmers. Thats because it is believed that Shepards told that story, and liked to believe that their work was more special than that of farmers.
And do you honestly believe that Adam, and Abraham, and Cain, and Moses (to name a few), all lived passed the age of 600? That somehow, despite the lack of decent medical care, which we enjoy today, these men and others managed to out live that average American by centuries?
I don't think the Bible should be taken literally. At least not the Hebrew Scriptures. The Christian Scriptures are more biographical, and since Jesus was the Son of God, all of his miracles should be taken literally. Still, the Christian Scriptures, as a whole, should not be taken literally.

PS: just a question, since I find your stance on the Bible to be incredibly interesting: were you brought up to believe the Bible that way?

sigh

08/16/03, 12:08 AM

i havent read most of the posts but: Saying that religion is only to control the masses is a form of reductionism a very ignorant view of religion. And yea there have been evidence of a great flood. It was because the Black Sea used to not be there, but some how the Mediterranean flooded into Europe and created the Black Sea. It was recent enough to have been recorded in history.

lollirot

08/16/03, 03:46 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
I could argue against evolution and you could argue against religion all night, but the fact is there is just as much proof in the Bible being real as there is proof in evolution. The only diffrence is many things in evolution has been proven false, nothing in the Bible has been proven false and it's been around much longer the Darwin.

Hey, we were never given a book and told that we had to be 100% certain about things. We have instead working hypotheses with supporting empirical evidence. Besides, how do you know the Bible is THE truth? Oh, and don't refer to the the unimaginative circular logic thing that goes "the Bible says so, and the Bible is God's word, and God must exist because of a huge book written by dumb, ignorant, and savage men with limited knowledge of the world". I mean, come on. The Bible was written by men who had very primitive views on the world and society. Please give me real evidence of how the Bible is truth, from other sources. Honestly, I would rather have actual facts than faith in something that can't be proven. "How can you believe in science when there are so many unknowns? Religion answers all the questions!" There's no progress in that, which is why you cant exactly prove it wrong. It is based on faith, and is unfalsifiable. The point of science is to turn the unknowns into knowns. Science is based on evidence, and it is falsifiable.

Sorry if I'm not making any sense and excuse any spelling/grammatical errors cause its 6 in the morning and I haven't slept at all and I can't be arsed to run a spellcheck.

yeat182

08/16/03, 07:55 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
No, cause like i said earlier there is significant evidence that the Bible is true. Jesus was a real person who was crucified, he did miracles that thousands of people witnessed and saw.

yes he was a real person...and real people don't come back from the dead.

yeat182

08/16/03, 07:57 AM

Originally posted by cal1082

Also where are the transitional species. You can't go from Monkey to Man without the middle species. Have they found a fully intact transitional specieas? No

they've found evidence of it in other species

yeat182

08/16/03, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by cal1082

The biggest question to me would be where are the transition species?

where is god?

yeat182

08/16/03, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by bossydacow
I'm not sure what your point is...

my point is that god must exist inside the universe and therefor could not create it...

yeat182

08/16/03, 08:03 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
How has science proven the old testement to be false? I've never seen it. Just like you said it's "believed" that shepards told that story. I dont see how someone can take one part of the Bible literally and then the next part take it as a parable when it doesnt say otherwise. Yeah I was brought up that way.

she just told you that men don't live to be 600 years old...its physically impossible.

yeat182

08/16/03, 10:02 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
This is also explained in the Bible. Many people before the great flood lived until that age. Then God said "My Spirit will not strive (abide) with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." (Genesis 6:3)

After God said this a few people still lived to be over 120, and then it tapered off dramatically.

except that in reality no one has ever lived to 600 years...

yeat182

08/16/03, 10:04 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
It's just strange they've never found a fully intact transitional species. They can only find seperate bones.

yeah, but over the course of millions of years, ice ages, floods, predators, humans using the bones as tools, it isn't really that strange to think that the bones have seperated over the course of time

yeat182

08/16/03, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
See you just answered my point for me. You asked a question and i answered it through what the Bible says. Instead of taking the answer for what it is, you total discredit it by saying well it's all BS anyways.

i'm not saying you have to believe what the scripture says cause you obviously dont. i'm just saying i gave you a good explanation that was in the Bible, but it wouldnt have mattered cause your response is that it's all fake anyways.

your questions have no point then.

but the fact that it's in the bible doesn't make it true...the fact that it is a phyical impossibility makes it false.

i've said before, i've read a book that said aliens came to earth and genetically engineered the human race, and the fact that its in a book doesn't make it true, and the fact that it can't be proven false, doesnt' make it true either.

yeat182

08/16/03, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by cal1082
yeah like dinosaur, wait we have full dinasaurs.

we have some full dinosaurs, and some that aren't. just like we have other species that are full, and some that aren't. also, i'm sure the ice age prevented most of the dinosaurs bones from being disturbed.

bossydacow

08/16/03, 11:19 AM

Originally posted by yeat182
my point is that god must exist inside the universe and therefor could not create it...

God is exempt from our defintions. He is God.

yeat182

08/16/03, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by cal1082
That's the point in the scripture i posted. At the time it was possible. You dont find this puzzling? This is from a site:

I have compiled a chronological list of Biblical people who lived longer than 120 years. As you scroll down the list to the point where God states the "120 year rule" notice the gradual decline to the 120 years of Moses. It is interesting to see that the last recorded person to live beyond 120 years was Jacob (otherwise known as Israel). Jacob was the father of Israel.

Adam = 930 years
Seth = 912 years
Enosh = 905 years
Cainan = 910 years
Mahalalel = 895 years
Jared = 962 years
Enoch =365 years
Methuselah = 969 years
Lamech = 777 years
Noah = 950 years

God says man will only live 120 years

Shem = 600 years
Arphaxad = 438 years
Salah = 433 years
Eber = 464 years
Peleg = 239 years
Reu = 239 years
Serug = 230 years
Nahor = 148 years
Terah = 205 years
Abraham = 175 years
Ishmael = 137 years
Isaac = 180 years
Jacob (Israel) = 147 years
Joseph = 110 years
Moses = 120 years
Joshua = 110 years

You will not find another person in the Bible from this point on that exceeds 120 years. God does not say that the shortening life span will be immediate. Despite this, many have read Genesis 6:3 and expect that God would have implemented that decision at that time.

There's many things in the Bible that have been proven true. Instead of me listing more, I'll just post a bunch of diffrent sites, and you can look for yourself.

http://www.biblemysteries.com/lectures/bible.htm

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/creation.shtml

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/dinos.shtml

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/subjects.shtml

http://www.slsoftware.com/study/html_outlines/Accuracy_Of_The_Bible.html

so how does that explain the dudes that lived to be 930 years old? if man can only live to be 120 why are there so many that "lived" to be much older than any human ever could?

ps. i'll check those site when i have more time, i'm interested in reading what they say.

yeat182

08/16/03, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by bossydacow
God is exempt from our defintions. He is God.

well, that's convenient

Charlito Cafe

08/16/03, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by bossydacow
God is exempt from our defintions. He is God.

So basically faith and logic are mutually exclusive.

Cal, about the one thing in the Bible that's ever been proven false: God created the world in 7 days. The Bible says that all life was created in the first 7 days. However, science tells us that the Earth is 4 billion years old and life didn't even begin to appear until much later in Earth's lifespan. Man did not appear on the 6th day of Earth's existence. Man appeared 10-15,000 years ago, a far cry short of 4 billion. There's one. So, interpreted literally, the Bible is wrong about this.

I'm not here to argue on behalf of evolution, because I don't know enough about it, however I do know that God did not create the world and all it's creatures in 7 days. I always thought that "God worked in mysterious ways." How mysterious is it to just say "Poof, here's the world." I'd be much more satisfied if I just watched my creation grow and change on it's own rather than set it all up in the beggining.