Atheism

[ItinerantLurker]

Your saying that monkey chromosome 11 and 12 fused to form human
chromosome 2. If so, how do you know that this is what happened?

Because of the position of the telomeres and centromeres in human chromosome 2. The only explanation for there to be two telomeres in the middle of a chromosome as they are is a fusion event - and our closest evolutionary relative just so happens to have two separate chromosomes that precisely match up.




Lurker

 

[David777]

Interesting.

Are you sure that these two original chromosomes were not
human chromosomes in the first instance. How could you
possibly know?

 

[ItinerantLurker]

Are you sure that these two original chromosomes were not
human chromosomes in the first instance.

That's certainly an interesting idea, but there's absolutely no evidence to support it whereas there is a ton of evidence showing that all members of hominidae except humans have 24 pairs of chromosomes, that chromosomal fusions do occur, and that humans share a higher degree of genetic similarity with Chimps than any other modern species.

You'd think that if human chromosome 2 were, in fact, the result of a chromosomal fusion of two human chromosomes we'd find some evidence of that. Curiously, we don't.




Lurker

 

[David777]

Good argument?

I do not see any similarity between humans and monkeys.

Since we have a fused chromosome that appears to be
a result of two chromosomes originating in monkey lineage.

This still does not mean that we were once monkeys.
I just cannot see how you could prove that this was the case.

Information contained on the chromosomes is by far much
more important. This is where the vast differences between
apes and humans is evident.

I think the devil is in the detail on this one. There is so much
we are ignorant of, i dare not jump the first hurdle as many
others have done in the past and tripped.

Perhaps some patience is in order as we have only recently
begun the genetic mapping of species.

Secondly, you had better hope my friend that God is not
making a monkey out of you.

 

[ItinerantLurker]

I do not see any similarity between humans and monkeys.

Then you don't seem to know much about either.

Since we have a fused chromosome that appears to be
a result of two chromosomes originating in monkey lineage.

True, but it does provide strong evidence of common descent.

This still does not mean that we were once monkeys.
I just cannot see how you could prove that this was the case.

At some point you need to ask yourself which is more reliable, claims that are consistent with evidence or claims that are contradicted by evidence. Common descent of modern humans and Chimps from a common ancestor several million years ago is supported by numerous lines of evidence, of which human chromosome 2 is simply one. On the other hand, sudden synonymous creation of humans and Chimps several thousand years ago is contradicted by numerous lines of evidence, of which human chromosome 2 is simply one.

Perhaps some patience is in order as we have only recently
begun the genetic mapping of species.

Well, we've got both the human and chimp genomes pretty much mapped, why not start there?

Secondly, you had better hope my friend that God is not
making a monkey out of you.

Why?




Lurker

 

[David777]

Interesting reply.

I think I know a lot about humans considering I am one myself.

Once again itinerantLurker you may be too quick in drawing
conclusions regarding human lineage.

I never claimed mankind was created "several thousand years ago".
So I am not defending that line of argument. I think Bishop Ussher offered that estimate based on sequential geneaology. There are a few problems with that attempt, but that is another topic.

As far as I am concerned it is impossible to arrive at a chronological
dating for the origin of mankind. Our knowledge is miniscule beyond about 10,000 years ago. In fact, we probably will never know the answer. I am puzzled to how you quoted "5 million years" that sir is speculation and riddled with assumptions.

We are not even sure where mankind originated let alone when.

One current theory is that we originated in Africa, I doubt this is true. I prefer the Middle East not just because the Bible says so.

Let the truth be known, Science has no reliable method for dating without the introduction of assumptions. An answer for the date of man's appearance is way beyond Science, we really have no idea do we.

Now back to the genomes, if you think that human chromosome 2 formed from two chimp chromosomes then that is what you think.
That is what your available evidence indicates of course. I am not jumping to any conclusions, I think I might wait another few decades
when genetic mapping is a little more mature. I have seen far too many mistakes in Science made by the hasty.

 

[brakelite]

These are great examples. Notice something about each of these: there is a reason to have faith in the person. You have a friend who has been trustworthy for years, so you let him borrow your stuff. You wouldn't let a complete stranger borrow something important and just trust him to give it back. You have reason to trust your friend. Now, why should I trust God when his answers look exactly like random chance via natural processes?

Why should you trust God? Jesus. He revealed who God is, what He is like, His nature, and the extent of His love. Jesus revealed to mankind the true nature of God. That is why you can trust Him.

It is true as someone said that no-one can prove God exists to another. But God is desperately seeking to prove Himself to you. What He wants from you first is complete honesty. He will not respond to a pretender, or someone who is hiding their true feelings. Be straight with Him. Open up entirely your innermost feelings and thoughts. Tell Him exactly why you do or dont believe. And if you really truly want to believe, and you are willing to follow up on that belief, then God has promised to answer everyone who calls upon Him.
God seeks for us first, but He doesn't gate crash. He knocks (Rev. 3:20), He calls our name (Gen 3:9) and earnestly desires your response. What He doesn't want to hear though is "I have prayed but I dont believe my prayers are going anywhere".
Jer. 29:11 For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.
12 Then shall ye call upon me, and ye shall go and pray unto me, and I will hearken unto you.
13 And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart.

God will stand by His own word...just like us, He wants His word to be trusted.

 

[namith]

Why should you trust God? Jesus. He revealed who God is, what He is like, His nature, and the extent of His love. Jesus revealed to mankind the true nature of God. That is why you can trust Him.

What evidence do you have to support this claim?

It is true as someone said that no-one can prove God exists to another. But God is desperately seeking to prove Himself to you. What He wants from you first is complete honesty. He will not respond to a pretender, or someone who is hiding their true feelings. Be straight with Him. Open up entirely your innermost feelings and thoughts. Tell Him exactly why you do or dont believe. And if you really truly want to believe, and you are willing to follow up on that belief, then God has promised to answer everyone who calls upon Him.

I'm glad you posted this, because this is exactly what I have done. I have been quite honest. I told God, "I don't believe you exist because there is no evidence to support your existence. However, if you do exist, I would very much like to know that and obey your will. So, if you want me to follow you, I would really appreciate some evidence of your existence." I also prayed similar prayers while I still slightly believe that God existed. And yet nothing.

Also, what if someone of another faith told you the exact same thing you just told me? What if a Muslim told you that God revealed his nature, that of Mohammed (God's final and greatest prophet), Jesus (a lesser, and human, prophet), and that you had to have faith in Allah and pray for guidance? Would you do this? Would this seem like a legitimate process for converting you to Islam?

 

[brakelite]

What evidence do you have to support this claim?

A changed life.

I'm glad you posted this, because this is exactly what I have done. I have been quite honest. I told God, "I don't believe you exist because there is no evidence to support your existence.

How can you say "I told God" and in the same breath say "I dont believe you exist"??? It's like turning on a light switch but not believing anything will happen knowing the bulb's blown. How do you expect Him to respond to that? The fact that you are breathing and mindful enough to even consider the existence of God is sufficient evidence. It also distinguishes you from apes.

However, if you do exist, I would very much like to know that and obey your will. So, if you want me to follow you, I would really appreciate some evidence of your existence."

"If" you want me to follow you? If God is your Creator, then following Him is a given surely. He owns you. But He has also given you the power to choose. You choose not to accept the evidence already supplied throughout creation. The problem isn't with God not supplying the evidence. The problem is with you not believing it.

Also, what if someone of another faith told you the exact same thing you just told me? What if a Muslim told you that God revealed his nature, that of Mohammed (God's final and greatest prophet), Jesus (a lesser, and human, prophet), and that you had to have faith in Allah and pray for guidance? Would you do this? Would this seem like a legitimate process for converting you to Islam?

It would be like someone trying to foist off a counterfeit father to me. Once you get to know the real thing, why would anyone turn away from Him and surrender to a pretender? Once faith is exercised, it develops into knowledge. Not knowledge about, but knowledge of.
Jer 9:24 But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD.

John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

It becomes a relationship. That is what God is seeking with you. A friendship built on His love for you through His Son Jesus. Throughout mankind's history this has been God's desire. He is absolutely totally in love with you, and despite your faults and foibles, even likes you. All He asks is that you believe that and take Him at His word.

Which, for those of us in any sort of a relationship be it marriage or familial, if we are honest, is all we have any right to expect of each other, right?

 

[namith]

A changed life.

Again, refer back to a point I made earlier in the thread. Converting to Buddhism changed my life. Does this constitute evidence for Buddhism?

How can you say "I told God" and in the same breath say "I dont believe you exist"??? It's like turning on a light switch but not believing anything will happen knowing the bulb's blown. How do you expect Him to respond to that? The fact that you are breathing and mindful enough to even consider the existence of God is sufficient evidence. It also distinguishes you from apes.

If I turn on a light switch, it will either come on or off, regardless of what I believe about its state. The same would be true of God. If I attempt to communicate with him, it will get to him if he exists, and accomplish nothing if he doesn't. Also, didn't you just tell me that I should open up and be honest about why I don't believe? What do you want me to do?

"If" you want me to follow you? If God is your Creator, then following Him is a given surely. He owns you. But He has also given you the power to choose. You choose not to accept the evidence already supplied throughout creation. The problem isn't with God not supplying the evidence. The problem is with you not believing it.

Again, what is this evidence of which you speak? Everything in nature has either already been explained through natural means, or will quite likely someday. There is no reason to believe that anything occurs because of divine action.

It would be like someone trying to foist off a counterfeit father to me. Once you get to know the real thing, why would anyone turn away from Him and surrender to a pretender? Once faith is exercised, it develops into knowledge. Not knowledge about, but knowledge of.

But you don't have any such knowledge. I used to think I knew God. I was actually a fairly strong Christian at one time. But then I realized that there really was no reason for me to think this. All the ideas I had about God were simply whatever I would be if I were all-powerful. His morals lined right up with mine. And everyone had different ideas about what God communicated to each of us through our "personal relationships." What gives you any reason to say that your ideas about God are correct, and an equally convinced Catholic, Evangelical, Muslim, or Hindu are wrong? Each has their relationship with God. Each has the exact same reason to believe what they do as you.

 

[brakelite]

Again, refer back to a point I made earlier in the thread. Converting to Buddhism changed my life. Does this constitute evidence for Buddhism?

Sure it does, and I'm glad your life has changed, hopefully for the better. I am somewhat surprised however that you can believe you will be reincarnated as a fly, toad, tiger or hippopotamus or whatever but don't believe in the Bible promise of a resurrection.

If I turn on a light switch, it will either come on or off, regardless of what I believe about its state. The same would be true of God. If I attempt to communicate with him, it will get to him if he exists, and accomplish nothing if he doesn't. Also, didn't you just tell me that I should open up and be honest about why I don't believe? What do you want me to do?

Fair enough...poor analogy.Unless you wore black eye patches to block out any light that may or may not develop from your action. You are looking for more evidence, when the earth is full of it. Maybe you are asking the wrong question. Maybe you ought to asking for eyes to see, rather than evidence.

Again, what is this evidence of which you speak? Everything in nature has either already been explained through natural means, or will quite likely someday. There is no reason to believe that anything occurs because of divine action.

Then your stated hope for the existence of God is untrue. Eternal life is plenty of reason to believe in the evidence. You simply choose not to.

But you don't have any such knowledge. I used to think I knew God.

Excuse me? You are judging me by your own limited experience?

I was actually a fairly strong Christian at one time.

No, you weren't. If you didn't know God personally, (and believe me, if you did, you would know it, not be in a position later to claim you were mistaken)

But then I realized that there really was no reason for me to think this.

If you came to the realisation that your "relationship" was a figment of your imagination, then you are right. There would be no reason for you to conclude you were a strong Christian, in fact, a Christian of any kind.

All the ideas I had about God were simply whatever I would be if I were all-powerful. His morals lined right up with mine.

Then the god you were worshiping was indeed a figment of your own mind, no better or worse than any idol from past antiquity. But because your experience is so , don't presume to judge others by your own.

Mt 7:21-23 (Jesus speaking)Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

And you gave God a moral standard that matched your own? Good grief man, you need to read your Bible. That is where you are going wrong. You are relying on your own intellectual wisdom and making god after your own image. The truth my friend works the other way around. God comes to us as we are,forgives us of our moral depravity, and over time changes us into His own image. Once we accept Him as our Saviour however He accepts us as if we had never sinned. Read the ten commandments. They are a transcript of God's character. If you can in all honesty claim you have kept every one perfectly all your life, then you are equal to God's moral standard. Remember though, Jesus said lust is the same as adultery, and unreasonable anger the same as murder.

And everyone had different ideas about what God communicated to each of us through our "personal relationships." What gives you any reason to say that your ideas about God are correct, and an equally convinced Catholic, Evangelical, Muslim, or Hindu are wrong? Each has their relationship with God. Each has the exact same reason to believe what they do as you.

Your first sentence I concur with. We are all individuals, and God recognises that individuality, and meets us where we are. And I have every reason to claim I am correct; call it arrogance if you like, I don't care. And why can I claim others wrong? Again, by the word of God. Jesus said "I am the Way, I am the Truth, I am the Life. No man comes to the Father except through Me."

 

[namith]

Sure it does, and I'm glad your life has changed, hopefully for the better. I am somewhat surprised however that you can believe you will be reincarnated as a fly, toad, tiger or hippopotamus or whatever but don't believe in the Bible promise of a resurrection.

I suppose I should have clarified; I am no longer a Buddhist. But if, by your own admission, this counts as evidence for Buddhism, why do you not convert to it?

You are looking for more evidence, when the earth is full of it. Maybe you are asking the wrong question. Maybe you ought to asking for eyes to see, rather than evidence.

Again I ask you, what evidence? What is there that would lead a rational person to believe in something imperceptible?

Then your stated hope for the existence of God is untrue. Eternal life is plenty of reason to believe in the evidence. You simply choose not to.

I said that if God exists, I would like to know that. Your statement about eternal life being reason to believe translates in my mind to, "I really want it to be true, so I believe it." I tell you what, I really want to have a million dollars, but that doesn't make it so.

Excuse me? You are judging me by your own limited experience?

I am judging you by the experience of billions of believers and former believers throughout history. So many have been convinced that they were correct, by the exact same standard of evidence you are using, and yet you consider so many of them to be wrong.

No, you weren't. If you didn't know God personally, (and believe me, if you did, you would know it, not be in a position later to claim you were mistaken)

If you came to the realisation that your "relationship" was a figment of your imagination, then you are right. There would be no reason for you to conclude you were a strong Christian, in fact, a Christian of any kind.

Now who is judging based on limited experience? I assure you, I believed in God. I felt a strong connection, and occasionally had what could be interpreted as divine experiences. But, after reading into such things, I realized that they can have natural explanations that do not necessitate an actual divine being. Human perceptions are actually quite fallible.

Indeed, if you want to claim that my Christianity was in some way disingenuous, you have to realize that your own very well could be. Apparently there is no standard by which a person can determine if they are, in fact, a Christian. You might very well be an atheist right now and not even know it.

And you gave God a moral standard that matched your own? Good grief man, you need to read your Bible. That is where you are going wrong. You are relying on your own intellectual wisdom and making god after your own image. The truth my friend works the other way around. God comes to us as we are,forgives us of our moral depravity, and over time changes us into His own image. Once we accept Him as our Saviour however He accepts us as if we had never sinned. Read the ten commandments. They are a transcript of God's character. If you can in all honesty claim you have kept every one perfectly all your life, then you are equal to God's moral standard. Remember though, Jesus said lust is the same as adultery, and unreasonable anger the same as murder.

If you actually thoughtfully read the entire Bible, you would realize that the ten commandments in no way match the character of God. God commits murder all the time.

Different people read the Bible and come to different conclusions about God and what he wants. And yet nobody's moral code is different than God's. Are you for or against gay marriage? What about God? How about abortion? I suspect your ideals line up with your perception of God's in these matters. And yet, other Christians disagree with you. I suspect their ideals line up with their perception of God's as well. Why do different people, each with their own personal relationship with God, come to differing conclusions about what he thinks is right and wrong?

I have every reason to claim I am correct; call it arrogance if you like, I don't care. And why can I claim others wrong? Again, by the word of God. Jesus said "I am the Way, I am the Truth, I am the Life. No man comes to the Father except through Me."

I have every reason to claim you are wrong; call it arrogance if you like, I don't care. And why can I claim you are wrong? By the word of God. "God is One, the Eternal God. He begot none, nor was he begotten."

Obviously, not a real quote, but that is Surah 112 from the Koran. Clearly infallible proof that God never had a son.

 

[brakelite]

I suppose I should have clarified; I am no longer a Buddhist. But if, by your own admission, this counts as evidence for Buddhism, why do you not convert to it?

Evidence that it can change lives for the better...not evidence that it promises eternal life. The Bible is unique in that it is the only book that promises eternal life and incorporates prophecy to substantiate and validate its authority.

Again I ask you, what evidence? What is there that would lead a rational person to believe in something imperceptible?

LOL so if someone like myself or Abby's Aunt sees the perfume of a flower, or the stars in the sky, or the love of a dear friend as evidence of a Creator, we are irrational?

I am judging you by the experience of billions of believers and former believers throughout history. So many have been convinced that they were correct, by the exact same standard of evidence you are using, and yet you consider so many of them to be wrong.

Some will be right, some wrong. Wide is the way that leads to destruction, and many there are who go that way. Doesn't change the promise of God in the scripture that says
Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Now who is judging based on limited experience? I assure you, I believed in God. I felt a strong connection, and occasionally had what could be interpreted as divine experiences. But, after reading into such things, I realized that they can have natural explanations that do not necessitate an actual divine being. Human perceptions are actually quite fallible.

I was judging you on your own testimony, and your presumption based on your own experience.
Quote:But you don't have any such knowledge. I used to think I knew God.

Indeed, if you want to claim that my Christianity was in some way disingenuous, you have to realize that your own very well could be. Apparently there is no standard by which a person can determine if they are, in fact, a Christian. You might very well be an atheist right now and not even know it.

That is, quite frankly, utter nonsense. Bottom line is that all along you have been and still are relying on your own ideas about life, God, morality, and because you refuse to accept evidence for anything greater than yourself, (you are in effect your own god by placing your own ideas above His) you reject the idea that anyone else could be experiencing a genuine relationship with a genuine God. So, like I said, you are judging those billions who died in hope and the assurance of a coming resurrection, and me and everyone else on this forum, based purely on your own limited experience.

If you actually thoughtfully read the entire Bible, you would realize that the ten commandments in no way match the character of God. God commits murder all the time.

So you are content to believe evil of God but not the good?

Different people read the Bible and come to different conclusions about God and what he wants. And yet nobody's moral code is different than God's. Are you for or against gay marriage? What about God? How about abortion? I suspect your ideals line up with your perception of God's in these matters. And yet, other Christians disagree with you. I suspect their ideals line up with their perception of God's as well. Why do different people, each with their own personal relationship with God, come to differing conclusions about what he thinks is right and wrong?

For the very reason that we are different. Different personalities and at different stages in our relationship.

 

[David777]

Dear Namith.

Interesting arguments, nevertheless God's firm foundation Jesus Christ
will always be there for you.

Have you read the messianic prophecies in the Old Testament?

I think that they are the proof that Jesus Christ was, and is God.

I am interested in how you read those prophecies.

 

[namith]

Evidence that it can change lives for the better...not evidence that it promises eternal life. The Bible is unique in that it is the only book that promises eternal life and incorporates prophecy to substantiate and validate its authority.

So we have established that a life-changing experience is not evidence for the truth of a religion. Which invalidates your earlier claim that such was evidence of Christianity for you.

Harry Potter gives an offer of eternal life (horcruxes), and incorporates prophecy, (which is validated). It has the same credentials that you consider to be the standard of evidence for the Bible.

LOL so if someone like myself or Abby's Aunt sees the perfume of a flower, or the stars in the sky, or the love of a dear friend as evidence of a Creator, we are irrational?

Ummm, definitely. Those things exist for natural reasons. Why is God at all necessary?

Some will be right, some wrong. Wide is the way that leads to destruction, and many there are who go that way. Doesn't change the promise of God in the scripture that says

Doesn't change all the promises given in the Koran. Why do you believe one and not the other?

That is, quite frankly, utter nonsense. Bottom line is that all along you have been and still are relying on your own ideas about life, God, morality

How do you determine a position to take (or at least God's position) on a moral issue? Consult the Bible, pray, think about what God should want in light of those things, right? That's what I used to do. If that means I was using my own ideas, then it means the same about you.

So, like I said, you are judging those billions who died in hope and the assurance of a coming resurrection, and me and everyone else on this forum, based purely on your own limited experience.

What about the billions of people you are also judging? What about every Muslim, Hindu, Bahai, Buddhist, etc. who ever believed they had a personal relationship with God, or that they were in tune with the ultimate nature of reality? By what standard do you judge them and conclude that they are incorrect while you are correct?

because you refuse to accept evidence for anything greater than yourself,

That is completely false. I accept the universe as greater than myself in many ways; human society as a whole. I do not refuse evidence for God, I simply do not see any.

you are in effect your own god by placing your own ideas above His

That would require that I first believe in him and accept that he has ideas. I do not claim to be perfect in any way, or any sort of god.

So you are content to believe evil of God but not the good?

I believe neither, of course. I am pointing out the internal inconsistencies of your position. You're the one who has to deal with the many evil acts God has allegedly committed.

For the very reason that we are different. Different personalities and at different stages in our relationship.

If two people claimed to have a personal relationship with the president, and one said he was a strong opponent of abortion while the other said he was a strong supporter of access to abortion, what would we conclude? Either these two people are not really in a personal relationship with the president, they did not really weigh his opinions before claiming to know them, or the president is intentionally deceiving at least one of them. Now, why would people at different stages in a relationship with God have diametrically opposing ideas about the nature and will of God? If God is actually participating in this relationship, why does he allow people to continue perceiving him so differently?

Have you read the messianic prophecies in the Old Testament?

I think that they are the proof that Jesus Christ was, and is God.

I am interested in how you read those prophecies.

Many of the prophecies pointed to as messianic are actually not prophecies at all, if read in context. Particularly the ones in David.

But even looking at actual prophecies, I do not consider them particularly significant. Most are vague.

But even if we were to accept that the Bible presents a good account of a fulfilled prophecy, that would in no way constitute evidence for the truth of the Bible. Why should I believe that those prophecies were actually fulfilled? Because the Bible says so?

What do you make of the fulfillment of the prophecy in Harry Potter? It clearly is proof that Harry is the chosen one.

 

[ItinerantLurker]

I think I know a lot about humans considering I am one myself.

That doesn't appear to have adequately prepared you to note the stunning genetic, morphological, and behavioral similarities between humans and Chimps.

I never claimed mankind was created "several thousand years ago".
So I am not defending that line of argument. I think Bishop Ussher offered that estimate based on sequential geneaology. There are a few problems with that attempt, but that is another topic.

I can't accurately depict a position that isn't given. If you have a position on this subject that you would like me to reference you need to actually state it.

As far as I am concerned it is impossible to arrive at a chronological
dating for the origin of mankind.

Curiously, scientists of all religious faiths and nationalities who actually study the origin of mankind disagree. There are certainly different theories and hypotheses on the subject, but the disagreements are pretty much in the minute details.

I am puzzled to how you quoted "5 million years" that sir is speculation and riddled with assumptions.

I'm puzzled as to what you're referencing as I don't recall saying anything about "5 million years".

One current theory is that we originated in Africa, I doubt this is true. I prefer the Middle East not just because the Bible says so.

Curiously, going with the bible over observed reality doesn't have a particularly good track record of success (just ask the geocentrists).

Let the truth be known, Science has no reliable method for dating without the introduction of assumptions.

Science has no reliable method for knowing anything at all without the introduction of at least some assumptions. Neither does theology, or any other field or philosophy. The question is not "What method employs no assumptions", but instead "What are more reliable - assumptions that are supported by evidence or assumptions that are contradicted by evidence?". Experience has clearly shown the former to be preferable to the latter.

Now back to the genomes, if you think that human chromosome 2 formed from two chimp chromosomes then that is what you think.
That is what your available evidence indicates of course. I am not jumping to any conclusions, I think I might wait another few decades
when genetic mapping is a little more mature. I have seen far too many mistakes in Science made by the hasty.

If this objection of yours is true then you must have some idea of what, specifically, could be found in the future in regards to the mapping of genomes that would change your mind. Care to share what that is?




Lurker

 

[David777]

Good answer ItinerantLurker.

May I quote your reply,

Let the truth be known, Science has no reliable method for dating without the introduction of assumptions. Science has no reliable method for knowing anything at all without the introduction of at least some assumptions. Neither does theology, or any other field or philosophy. The question is not "What method employs no assumptions", but instead "What are more reliable - assumptions that are supported by evidence or assumptions that are contradicted by evidence?". Experience has clearly shown the former to be preferable to the latter.

This sums up man's intellectual endeavors, be it philosophy, science, etc.

Assumptions have to be made do they not.

Now we are making progress IL, the Bible has only ever claimed to be
revelation from God. There are no assumptions in the Bible!

Also, the messianic prophecies are not vague at all, in fact they tell us
more than we could expect. In addition they are rather precise.

 

[namith]

Also, the messianic prophecies are not vague at all, in fact they tell us
more than we could expect. In addition they are rather precise.

A few might be considered precise, eg Isaiah 53. But many scholars interpret this to refer to a suffering Israel. Indeed, it contains a few descriptions that are not accurate if referring to Jesus, who did in fact have majesty to attract people to him. And again, many of the "prophecies" mentioned in the New Testament are not even prophecies. "He would be called a Nazarene" Matthew 2:22-23. That, at best, is a reference to the Nazirite Samson Judges 13.

But most importantly, why does it matter if the prophecies are specific or vague, presented as being fulfilled or not? Harry Potter has a specific prophecy which is fulfilled; why do you not accept it as divine truth?

 

[Thiscrosshurts]

It is easy to discount scripture if we approach it as a science or history book.It was never meant to be taken literally.The stories contain patterns and cycles in life that wise men took note of and kept dear.
These many wisdom's were encrypted within scriptures.
The scriptures are spiritual and are supposed to be spiritually discerned so that the wise of the world will think they are foolishness.

So they are not supposed to make "wise man" sense.
They are supposed to make "spiritual" sense,and that they do well.

The existence of the placebo effect leads me to believe faith has substance.All you need for the placebo effect is a reasonable expectation.So in a sense the power of the belief in God is a force in and of itself.

 

[s.i.e.]

namith and ItinerantLurker: for whatever reason, you boys have chosen to accept and adapt the kind of monumental faith necessary to believe that there is no God, and that we became these complex species from a single cell ameba back in the day. You feel comfortable having accepted such wild leaps of faith, by somehow believing that science supports you in it, and that is may only be a matter of time until science gets around the gaping holes and begging questions overlooked, such as the missing-link(ssss...) or the ability to put the big-bang theory through the scientific method.

And yet, you point the finger towards the Judeo-Christian crowd, telling us of your incredulousness that we would base our lives on something so simple and naive as a concept like faith.

The truth here is that you've got a lot of 'splaining to do here, if you are really going to set out to scientifically prove all that you believe. Because you can't.

If you want to be athiests, then be athiests...but at least don't lie to yourselves by calling it science. Your belief systems take at least as much faith as do ours, and in my opinion, far more.

My strongest and most loving advice to you, is that you reconcile that internally with yourself.