ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Why So Many Worldviews

Why do you think there are so many different expressions and views on how Christianity is defined, and how it is supposed to be played out in this world?

Join Our Free Penpals and Take The Worldview Quiz
 ---Catholicus on 5/22/12
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



StrongAxe the experiments you mention give strong evidence life could not have occurred naturalistically. The experiments involved a sealed glass apparatus filled with gases considered necessary to form life-methane, ammonia and hydrogen with water vapour, simulating the ocean. A heating coil kept the water boiling, while the gasses were zapped via a 60,000 volt spark-discharge device, simulating lightning. Below a water-cooled condenser cooled and condensed the mixture allowing it to fall into a safe trap.

Did they create life or its precursors? No! Only simple amino acids, left-handed and right-handed. For life amino acids need to be exclusively left-handed. This created mixture has no relevance to the building blocks of life.
---Warwick on 5/29/12


Atheist you wrote "No. I just should some of the examples of why this is bad science." ???

The point regarding C14 is that if any is present the maximum possible age is c80,000 years. If any C14 is present the millions/billions of years are nonsense. It has nothing to do with the accuracy of c14 dating, just that its presence disproves the millions/billions of years.

C14 has been found in diamonds supposedly billions of years old. And because of the strength of the latices within diamonds there is no way they could have become contaminated via c14 leaching in.

Bye bye billions of years!
---Warwick on 5/29/12


StrongAxe,

Miller-Urey's experiment DOES prove evolution CANNOT do it. Two ''angles'' to life's proteins, left and right. Chance chemistry i.e. evolutionary i.e. M-U's, ALWAYS produces a racemic mixture i.e. left and right. However, life only uses left variety, ALWAYS! It's a universal law. A skilled biochemist can easily produce the correct ''optically active'' left molecules i.e. through intelligent design. Evolution, theoretically and empirically, can't do it. It knocks evolution out of the arena before it has had any chance to allow chance to weave its magic.

In my undergraduate degree I, researched, wrote and argued about this. You should do some investigation of the REAL science too.
---Marc on 5/29/12


Marc:

I'm not talking about chemists doing complex processes to create large chemicals out of small ones.

By "lab conditions", I meant that a bunch of inorganic chemicals were dumped in sealed equipment in a lab, under conditions similar to those presumed to exist on an early earth, and just left alone to stew by themselves, and being observed without interference. Years later, they contained sugars, amino acids, nucleotides, etc. that had assembled themselves, with no outside help.

Google "abiogenesis" or "Miller-Urey" for more details.

Such experiments can never prove life DID originate this way. However, they can disprove the ID idea that life COULD NOT HAVE originated this way.
---StrongAxe on 5/29/12


bad science: Carbon14 dating is based on assumptions that are in error and the result are not dates, but a number that is compared to an 'agreed upon' chart, that is also full of erring assumptions.
Even once organic material (fossils) pulled from rock layers said to be millions of years old has carbon14 in it..what's that say about the radiometric dating of the rocks? false? contaminated? Varing rates of decay?
Most dating methods show a young Earth and dispute the Carbon and radiometric dating methods...you can't mix historical science with observational science... you end up with ...bad science...
---micha9344 on 5/29/12




Warwick,

No. I just should some of the examples of why this is bad science.

C14 dating is only accurate to 50,000 years. You know that.
---atheist on 5/29/12


Atheist you wouldn't define what you meant by "good science." Now you say this is "bad science." Interesting.

The truth is a scientist collected the samples and they were given to Geochron Laboratories for testing with no comment. They came up with an age of up to 2.8 million years for rock c10 years old when tested! If we know the age of something radiometric dating results are shown wrong. If we do not know the age of something radiometric dating results are assumed correct

At the Crinum mine in Queensland, Australia timber was dated c20,000yrs by c14, encapsulated in basalt supposedly 30myrs. The millions of years evaporates because if any c14 is present the maximum age is c80,000 years.
---Warwick on 5/29/12


StrongAxe,

"Under laboratory conditions...self-assembled...DNA"? You're joking, aren't you? Lab conditions are by Intelligent Design. Self-assembled is due to their inherent chemical properties and never produces highly complex life constituent materials. Scientists put in a whole lot of intelligence to get what they want out of it.

Re Zeus, call him X or a tomato, or YHWH, but if you're claiming that he brought the universe into existence, then that is who God is. Logically, can an omnipotent being, in contradistinction to an "omnipotent" principle do it? Why yes, as there is nothing against reason in that proposition.
---Marc on 5/29/12


StrongAxe I do have access to research scientists, expert in the field. As they say it isn't what you know but who you know.

We all know of various experiments designed to replicate life. All have failed. Further they are a contradiction in terms. In the evolutionary hypothesis life is claimed to have appeared without intelligent input and not in a laboratory situation. Further it appeared as life, immediately able to replicate itself. I phoned a highly qualified resarch scientist who reminded me the simplest self-rerplicating life form needs 400+ proteins with all the DNA this entails. And there needs to be 500,000 nucleotide letters in the DNA, all in the correct order and it all needs to assemble at the same instant.
---Warwick on 5/29/12


Atheist,
My post was a plain, polite and undilluted question .
You said,"It does not have to be one or the other"
You bailed on it.
I rest my case.
---earl on 5/29/12




Why do you think there are so many different expressions and views on how Christianity is defined, and how it is supposed to be played out in this world?

The biblical answer is:
Rev 12:12 Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

Rev 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as [the feet] of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Rev 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
---francis on 5/28/12


Warwick:

You said: Indeed life is far too complicated to have come about by unguided processes.

Such a claim requires a detailed knowledge of statistics, biochemistry, etc.

While nobody has yet demonstrated an unbroken path from inorganic chemicals to man, various pieces have been seen. For example, under laboratory conditions, inorganic chemicals have self-assembled amino acids, nucleotides, proteins, and short nucleic acid chains (e.g. DNA).


Marc:

You said: Zeus doesn't have the ontological wherewithall to bring complex biological organs and the universe into existence

How can you KNOW that for sure? The existence (or not) of Zeus is a matter of faith, not science.
---StrongAxe on 5/28/12


Earl,

It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Warwick,

Rubble indeed---were the results duplicated by other scientists, taking samples from the same place? Did more than one lab have similar results? Does the investigator have an agenda? Indeed he does: "This challenges those who promote the faith of radioisotope dating, especially when it contradicts the clear eyewitness chronology of the Word of God."

Is the dating method used considered reliable for samples recently produced? No. Then why was it used if other scientists consider it unreliable?

So you got the bad results that you wanted.

Rubble.

In any case, this article is not scientific, does not disprove evolution or prove creation.
---atheist on 5/28/12


Can we get back to the original subject, which is NOT creation vs evolution?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 5/28/12


Atheist,
Proof of creation , ID and etc universe vs a material only spontaneous evolutional universe ?
My question to you,is the universe mechanistic ,that is, the universe is nothing more than a machine having no external influence functioning upon it?
---earl on 5/28/12


Jerry,

Nor am I playing your silly little game.

Why attempt to argue in 125 words the theory of evolution while you sit there with no evidence, only belief in the GodSpokeIt Theory, with no evidence whatsoever?

Theories are derived from facts, not from cherry picked examples that prove a prior belief. Evolution was derived so. ID came to disprove evolution because it was a threat to the literal interpretation of scripture.
---atheist on 5/28/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


Atheist you must be a sensitive little soul if you feel attacked.

You say the ID group do not explain how things were created but you do the same. As regards the naturalistic origin of life you just say it happened. And this is the big step, where it supposedly all started. How did it happen? Dunno!

How did a reptile evolve into a bird? Natural selection and mutations did it, evolutionists say. That answers nothing.

Indeed life is far too complicated to have come about by unguided processes. Can you imagine the massive amount of new, unique, specific genetic information needed to transform a reptile into a bird? And this all came about by chance!
---Warwick on 5/28/12


Atheist, you falely claimed there was "bad science" on the Creation website. You couldn't give proof though you had plenty of time. You provided none as it is not there.

You challenged me to provide an example of "good science" and I did. You will not acknowledge this "good science", because you don't understand radiometric dating, its inbuilt assumptions, and unreliability. And you know the article and the radiometric dating carried out shows long-ages demonstated by such dating methods are fraudulent. When the actual age of something is known radiometric dation is proved totally wrong. When the age is unknown the ages given are assumed to be correct. And you call that science!
---Warwick on 5/28/12


StrongAxe,

Zeus doesn't have the ontological wherewithall to bring complex biological organs and the universe into existence. Placing names, e.g. Odin, on a Being and saying 'It can't happen' is no argument. Creationists rightly argue evolutionists MUST demonstrate naturalistic processes observable TODAY explaining life. They CAN'T is reasonable proof there isn't any. Saying, 'Let's have faith one day we'll see one' is a meta-physical philosophical-religious principle that naturalism explains reality. To say 'Since evolution is true, eyes came through evolution' is question-begging at best, dullness of mind at worst. Think of it this way: evolutionists say a metaphysical process did it, creationists say a Person.
---Marc on 5/28/12


Warwick:

Atheist was not questioning Creationists' "belief" in creation - however belief is not science. He was questioning whether they had any solid SCIENTIFIC proof of creation or intelligent design.

Note that while Intelligent Design may claim that certain evolutionary claims are impossible (such as the evolution of the eye, etc.) and these necessarily require design by an intelligent creator, there is no way to scientifically go beyond this to scientifically determine from this just WHO that creator was - Jehovah, or Zeus, or Odin, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Such issues go totally beyond the realms of what science can determine and become matters of pure faith.
---StrongAxe on 5/28/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


Warwick,

Creationism, aka, ID is but an empty suit. Saying god did it explains nothing. ID is not even a theory: it is simply the belief that to some things appear too complex not to have been designed. It does not debunk, much less replace the theory of evolution, developing explanations provided by other science disciplines for the universe, and multiple observations in multiple sciences.

The promoters of ID go nowhere after the god did it part. No how explanations. No descriptions of processes. Nothing. Just god did it. God spoke it and it was so. The flying spaghetti monster is reputed to have done the same.

You attack me personally and defend your belief as science. I have no further interest in this game.
---atheist on 5/28/12


A theist: I guess you missed this, so here it is again:

"None which meet my standards starts with looking at evidence and building a theory based on that evidence"

Does Evolution meet your evidence-based standards? Please explain exactly what evidence (not assumptions, conjecture, or fraud) leads to the theory of Evolution as you understand it. I'll bet you can't come up with any.


---jerry6593 on 5/28/12


Catholicus, there is many different expressions ad views because we are all different, with different minds, thoughts, and prior teachings from others. But there is only One Truth. There is nothing wrong with the Bible but many things wrong with man. But we do have the Word of God to compare with what others say. Our faith is in the Word, and not on what man says.
I don't even know why anyone here would spend time answering athiest. He has no faith, how does anyone expect him to answer someone without faith? It is impossible. He is no different then many so call Chrisians who speak alot of stuff and have no faith in the Truth either. The only difference is that those so call Christians pretend they are Christians. Athiest does not.
---Mark_V/ on 5/28/12


Atheist you wonder if Creationists believe in creation? Now that's a hard one!

All people have beliefs and will interpret the world around them via such beliefs. You do.

I referred you to just one of hundreds, maybe thousands, of science-based articles upon the Creation website. You have nothing intelligent to say, preferring to scribble innanity. Where's the science in that?

You believe life popped into being on its own, without causal cause,immediately able to replicate itself don't you? Maybe you have not thought it through. Where did all the specific, unique genetic information come from? And you attempt to ridicule those who propose the appearance of life needed a cause? Ho Ho!
---Warwick on 5/27/12


Shop For Christian Fundraising


Warwick,

"The creationist view" requires a theory. What is it? That there was a creator? No science there. Who made the creator? How did the creator get this creating done? What's the theory on that?

You could disprove all of evolution, but you would still have no ID or creation theory. You got nothing.
---atheist on 5/27/12


Atheist,

Have you forgotten to take your pills this morning...and the previous morning...and...?
---Marc on 5/27/12


Marc,

Lazy is what ID folks are. They spend their time trying to debunk evolution and no time explaining what ID is. There is no explaining it, because there is nothing to explain. There is no ID theory whatsoever. If there is give it up and tell the world....
---atheist on 5/27/12


Atheist, laying aside the scientific method, let us consider beliefs based upon evidence. Imagine an atheist long-ager/evolutionist and a Creationist viewing the Grand Canyon. The same evidence but their world view will colour what they see. The long-ager will believe the forces acting there today are they which have acted for eons-uniformitarianism. The creationist will assuredely believe the canyon was cut during Noah's Flood by deep rapidly flowing water acting upon unconsolidated sediments-catastrophism. Same evidence, 2 views. Neither is using bad science as the scientific method cannot prove who is correct. Do you accept this?

BTW I believe the evidence better fits with the Creationist view.
---Warwick on 5/27/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


Atheist I will let you off the hook regarding bad science on the Creation website. You now know there is none.

An interesting science-based article is 'Radio-dating in Rubble.' Potassium-Argon (K-Ar) dating was done by Geochron Laboratories, Cambridge MA., upon dacite lava formed c10 years before. However results showed the lava to be up to 2.8 million years old. To forstall an objection the K-Ar method works via the radiometric decay rate of Potassium into Argon. The tests should have shown zero Ar as the rocks are young. But they didn't, radiometric dating is based upon untestable assumptions and shown to be hoplessly wrong when the age of rocks is independantly known.
---Warwick on 5/27/12


also marc,

Why are there only two choices? The complete collapse of the theory of evolution would do nothing to support the ID theory which also does nothing because it does not exist. I could create third, you a fourth, another a fifth. Soon we would have hundreds of theories all competing. Test would me made and new candidate for theory of creation would be had.
---atheist on 5/27/12


A theist: "None which meet my standards starts with looking at evidence and building a theory based on that evidence"

Does Evolution meet your evidence-based standards? Please explain exactly what evidence (not assumptions, conjecture, or fraud) leads to the theory of Evolution as you understand it. I'll bet you can't come up with any.





---jerry6593 on 5/27/12


Atheist,

Regurgitatingatheist ''killer blow'' question What's Creation Science, means you haven't investigated ID. Lazy. One component: It's a research investigating the conditions that life, the universe etc, cannot be reasonably explained via purely naturalistic philosophy.

Furthermore, as Shapiro argued, there are only two explanations, evolution and ID. If evolution cannot explain fundamental prerequisites for, say, life's origin, and ID can, rational men choose ID. Creation Science investigates fundamental aspects of life's origin like the rise of optically active amino acids and complex genetic information, its coding, storage and retrieval mechanisms. This is all found on many creation science websites, if you'd looked.
---Marc on 5/26/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates


You claimed that this site has science based claims on it.

I find none.

None which meet my standards starts with looking at evidence and building a theory based on that evidence---not reading the bible and looking for ostensibly supportive bits here an there, and looking for outlier circumstances to "prove" evolution false.

All articles seem to either be based on Bible quotes and/or some reference to information that claims to debunk evolution.

Nowhere is the theory of "Creation" or "Intelligent design" laid out. Only claims that evolution is false.

What is the "THEORY OF CREATION"?
---atheist on 5/26/12


Atheist, it was you who claimed there was "bad science" on the Creation website, but have not been able to give proof of this. Therefore your claim was false. The fact you have been unable to do so exposes that you either spoke in ignorance of what was on the site,(which is in itself deceitful) or you knowingly lied. Your choice.

Please give examples of "bad science" on the Creation site and explain why you consider it to be "bad science." Also explain what you consider to be good science. If you do this I will be happy to give an example of good science. However I cannot do this until you explain what you call "good/bad science."

Define your terms!
---Warwick on 5/25/12


atheist, my point is that those truly of christ do not have to wait. it was made available, is now, and always will be. true disciples are not waiting. but, to think we can do anything without Him are mistaken.
---aka on 5/25/12


aka,

If you read what you quoted you would see it is a solution.
---atheist on 5/25/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Marketing


God spoke and then it happened? Is that a serious scientific explanation?
---atheist on 5/21/12

It has appeal to me.
I mean the choice is, Darwin spoke, Dawkins spoke and it was so. When obviously they come in as fools when the magnifier comes out.

GOD's proof has more appeal when I put the rest of his witness'es to the test. They prove out. Something you laugh about but, are afraid to research. Your lazy atheist.
Now you test these self proclaimed preacher/dogmaticals...but, they don't have answers. They are not teachers. There is only one Matt23:8-108 be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master,even Christ all ye are brethren.
9 call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, in heaven.
---Trav on 5/25/12


//I think the world would be a better place if we all acknowledged that if pain and suffering are to end, it is up to us to end it---not wait for some imaginary sky god to answer prayers, or for "evil" to be gotten rid of.// ---atheist on 5/24/12

the problem is that you keep avoiding God by arguing with "christians". the scenario that you described is very common but not biblical. the "sky god" as you put it made it possible to do what you describe. the sky god will not eradicate evil for us, but through us. we let it in. we, through and with our creator, will take it out.

why do you spend so much time arguing with the problem instead of participating in the solution?
---aka on 5/24/12


Warwick,

So you can make claims about what you think I believe that are false but that is not lying? Remarkable.

Point out one claim on the website that can be backed by scientific methods!

You can't do it....
---atheist on 5/24/12


Warwick:

Saying something you KNOW is false is lying. Saying something you BELIEVE is false is faith.

Also, science is a matter of conclusions that can be INDEPENTLY verified. If one person says something is true, and you must take that conclusion on trust, it's faith, not science - regardless of how true the claim is, even if the person telling you is God himself.
---StrongAxe on 5/24/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Life Insurance


Atheist when you make false claims knowing there is no truth to these claims that is, by definition, lying.

I think that maybe you made your initial claims in your atheistic antiChristian passion. But when challenged for proof realized there was none.

If you behave yourself and don't make further false claims I will refrain from calling you a liar. It's so easy.
---Warwick on 5/24/12


Atheist, I have said what I think. I don't expect you to agree. That's okay. Peace to you.
---Catholicus on 5/24/12


There is bad science on the site. I gave examples. (All examples are from the site.) You are trying to wiggle away.

When your only escape is to falsely call another man a liar, you need a better religion.

Again, just one example of real science on the website. There is none.
---atheist on 5/24/12


Cath,

No. I think the world would be a better place if we all acknowledged that if pain and suffering are to end, it is up to us to end it---not wait for some imaginary sky god to answer prayers, or for "evil" to be gotten rid of.
---atheist on 5/24/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money


Strong Axe, I agree, God called it good. But it wasn't the best, which God is now working out in salvation history.
---Catholicus on 5/24/12


Catholicus:

You wrote: Atheist, do you think the world would be a better place if there were no pain or discomfort or confusion, if everything were perfect for everyone, and no human being would ever need to display or receive comfort or compassion from anyone because no one never felt hurt? What a sterile world that would be!

That was exactly the kind of world people lived in before the Fall. God created such a world, and saw that it was good.
---StrongAxe on 5/23/12


Atheist you falsely claimed (nothing new there) that there was bad science on the Creation site. When pushed a few times for an example you gave a part quote from a book which has absolutely nothing to do with this site.

Then you gave some examples which were not offered as scientific but are Biblical exegesis. Again you have been caught in falsehood. It is up to you to give evidence for your claim, not me. But you give no evidence as you have none.
---Warwick on 5/24/12


atheist, Do you know why it is not clear to everyone?

God foretold long ago that in the last days perilous times shall come. (2Tim.3:1-5). That false teachers would arise, who because of their greed and want of personal gain would deceive many. So God "sealed His words" so that "none of the wicked shall understand" (Dan.12:4,9-10) That they may attempt to always learn but will never come to the knowledge of the truth. (2Tim.3:7)

But "Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God..." (Mark4:11). Those who are in the true church/body of Christ, where the true gospel of Christ is preached, will understand. It is to the true christians that all His words is made clear.
---jonweckl on 5/24/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


StrongAxe, you wrote "The same as creationists who witnessed God creating fish - zero. If evolution isn't science, creationism isn't either." Who witnessed Creation? God did! Humans, do not make perfect eye-witnesses. But you must believe God is The ultimate eye-witness and we have His personal testimony.

The evolutionist has nothing but an interpretation of the evidence, the same evidence as creationists have. But the Creationist has God's faultless testimony. That should be enough for any Christin but apparently not for you.

This does not mean we can prove Biblicasl Creation by the scientific method but neither can evolution be proved.

You apear to reject God's eye-witness. A little odd don't you think?
---Warwick on 5/24/12


Atheist, do you think the world would be a better place if there were no pain or discomfort or confusion, if everything were perfect for everyone, and no human being would ever need to display or receive comfort or compassion from anyone because no one never felt hurt? What a sterile world that would be!
---Catholicus on 5/23/12


Do you have two perspectives on what is on the creation site? One:biblical "explanation" and the Other:"science".

I see no differences in what is presented. If you have an article that is "science" show me, and we can discuss that.

The article I quoted is all the proof of bad science needed.
---atheist on 5/23/12


The Urantia Book is fiction.
Some have elevated it above the Bible and even worship it as truth.
Atheist would see no difference in this mythological book as he sees the Bible, but there is a difference, and that is what needs to be found out for every unbeliever.
The Bible and the Urantia Book are not on the same playing field.
---micha9344 on 5/23/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


...because he would have the power to change all of that. Since he does not, he either does not exist, or created us to suffer, making him a sadistic and not loving god.
---atheist on 5/22/12

I have heard this dribble so many times. Yuk!!!

First, God loves you enough to allow you to do what you want. Your selfish desires trump everyone elses selfish desires and the result is strife, dischord, and fighting. Suffering in the world is a result of OUR actions on our selfish desires. Poverty is a result of greed and war is nations acting on their sefish desires.

Secondly, if God made Himself known, would it really make a difference? Would you bow your knees to Him as God and do what He says or shake your fist in His face?
---Mark_Eaton on 5/23/12


Warwick:

In "Proof of Earth's Age", Marc wrote: Empirical science entails an observer i.e. the scientist. Sorry, mate, but exactly how many evolutionists were around to see when/how that semi-fish, not quite yet amphibian crawled out of the sea?

The same as creationists who witnessed God creating fish - zero. If evolution isn't science, creationism isn't either.



francis:

You asked there: If I understand you right, all creatures would have the same amount of carbon 14 so we could not tell which was older?

WHILE ALIVE, all creatures have the same carbon 14 proportion as the environment. This decreases after death, as they stop eating. How much less shows how long it is after death.
---StrongAxe on 5/23/12


Atheist a healthy lifestyle is not forced upon individuals by government. Maybe it should be as such poor lifestyles place a massive impost upon any nation. And it is we taxpayers who pay the bills for those who against all reason prefer to live a deathstyle rather than a lifestyle.

Likewise God does not impose Himself upon us like a dictator, but sent His Son to die in our place taking the due penalty of our sin.

Over the ages, and today countless numbers of people have availed themselves of God's free offer of forgiveness. It is available to you.

Maybe you would prefer that faith in Jesus be made mandatory? After all history shows us atheists are leaders in forcing their beliefs upon others.
---Warwick on 5/23/12


Talking about lifestyles what about Stalin's Darwin-inspired atheistic life style which brought about the murder of 10's of millions of people.

Reading Darwin had an enormous impact upon me. It corroborated my defiance of God and inspired me to systematically break all the Ten Commandments, which I now realized were only chains. Thought I had stolen and lied before, I now stole and lied with a higher purpose-freedom of self. And the effects on my political philosophy were equally lasting. Historians of the future may also conclude that Darwinism+ Leninism = Stalinism. Richard Lourie, 1999 the autobiography of Joseph Stalin. Counterpoint , Washington D.C., page 36.
---Warwick on 5/23/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


Atheist said: "he either does not exist, or created us to suffer, making him a sadistic and not loving god."

I see here you acknowledge the possibility of God's existence.

Christians will tell you however, that God is love. Read 1Corinthians 13 and see for yourself a description of God's character.

As for the suffering we see, read the Bible to see the big picture. God loves you and there's a lot more going on than you recognize.
---Haz27 on 5/23/12


atheist: "He would not allow us to wallow in pain, poverty, war, fear of death, hell, and himself, ignorance,and confusion because..."

It is not God that allows all this grief, it is man. God said (in a roundabout way), " OK, Man, if you think you can do better than I, then I will let you try." And look at the shape of the world today when mankind tried to do it on his own.
---Steveng on 5/23/12


Atheist,
You wrote "if there was really one God he would make it all clear to everyone".
Have you began reading 'The Urantia Book' or are have you been sleeping since the last time I spoke to you here?.
Your request, like others, asking for the same has been answered since 1955AD when it was first published.
Basically,
The origin as you know of all the world religions were inspired by God as taught by those teachers in early history of man.The core and central truths are retained by some,modified and discarded by others.The results are as you see them a confusing mix with some submerged core truths and heavily modified doctrine.
Now man has understanding avaliable for clarification.
---earl on 5/22/12


Catholicus,

No what I am saying is that if there were a god, having omnipotence, he would make it clear to everyone what was up. He would not allow us to wallow in pain, poverty, war, fear of death, hell, and himself, ignorance,and confusion because he would have the power to change all of that. Since he does not, he either does not exist, or created us to suffer, making him a sadistic and not loving god.
---atheist on 5/22/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


Chira, a good, thoughtful answer.
---Catholicus on 5/22/12


Atheist I could not let your nonsense on another thread go by without comment. You are saying that Christians on a Christian site talking about what the Bible says is "bad science." This only proves you opened your mouth before your brain was engaged. I am still awaiting proof of "bad science" on the Creation website. You know, a scientific article which you believe includes "bad science" as compared to an explanation of what the Bible says. I think I will be waiting a long time.

It is obvious to many here that you know little if anything about Scripture, and little about science. If you did you would know the difference between the scientific method, and Biblical exegesis.
---Warwick on 5/22/12


Atheist, I think we all know that a sedentary lifestyle, smoking, gluttony, drug taking, and drunkeness are all deadly. In the last 20 years we have all been informed, over and over, as to the very real dangers involved in these habits. Nonetheless a large percentage of humanity, maybe even the majority, willingly continues in such deadly lifestyles.

It is not that people do not know who their Creator and Redeemer is, but that they like those above are adicted to a certain mindset. They are willingly ignorant 2 Peter 3:5.
---Warwick on 5/22/12


there are two schools...
one school listens to what GOD say's.... one School listens to what mere mortal men say GOD is trying to say...
---kevin5443 on 5/22/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


Because there are different levels of understanding which is shaped by the individual's knowledge of Christ, the New Testament scriptures, and their personal life experiences in their relationship with Christ. Some are new novices to the faith, only walking with Jesus for a short time, and others are older Christians with more wisdom and life experiences living with Christ. And then there are NonChristians that think that they are Christians because they have and/or perform "religion", when in fact they are still in the flesh.
---Eloy on 5/22/12


If there was really one god he would make it all clear to everyone. Since there is not, there many worldviews, made up by each believer, with each believer having his own god at the center.
---atheist on 5/22/12
1 Cor 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, as there be gods many, and lords many, But to us there is but one God,

This is really the work of the devil. First to tell men that God withold truth from them, then to tell men that there is no God, and if they believe there is a God, then to tell them that God does not love them

Matthew 13:25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. Matthew 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the
---francis on 5/22/12


Atheist: Do you still have the same world view as you did when 3yrs old, or 15 yrs old?
Likewise amongst Christians who are at different stages of growth.

Add to the mix those like yourself who reject God, in various ways. This also creates differing world views. Some professing Christians reject God by establishing their own righteousness instead of in Christ.
Such are like you. They just reject God differently.

Matt 13:15:"Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive, For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears"

It's your choice.
---Haz27 on 5/22/12


Actually, Atheist is right. Jesus prayed for unity in John 17:20-23. If we had followed the teachings of Jesus Christ we would all be united in thought and purpose and would be living with Him today.

Unfortunately, someone came along and planted a bunch of lies in with the truth and most of us just gobbled it up without thinking. Read the parable of the wheat and tares.

It is no wonder that Atheist is an atheist when he sees the state that "christians" are in today.
---barb on 5/23/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


A number of people are looking for people to copy-cat them or to copy-cat so they can use people as a group for what they want. So, there are plenty of public ways of religion not meant to unify but to isolate people to ones who want to use them. These "people hoarders" are like animal hoarders, thinking or pretending to save them but not giving them what they need.

"the kingdom of God is within you" (in Luke 17:21) God in us has us understanding and doing better than what many are telling us. And we help each other, as "members of one another" (Romans 12:5, Ephesians 4:25). The public show and tell stuff is limited, at best.
---willie_c: on 5/23/12


Atheist, perhaps what you are really saying is that if you were God, you would make it clear to everyone. Peace to you.
---Catholicus on 5/22/12


I am looking forward to some interesting and helpful responses.
---Catholicus on 5/22/12


There are many different expressions since EVERY man is right in his (her) own eyes, and no two individuals think exactly alike. Their thinking comes from a variety of circumstances and influences, including personality, so it's little wonder. To whatever extent Christians' thinking are lined up with the Word/having their minds renewed, impacts believers being in one accord.
---chria9396 on 5/22/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


If there was really one god he would make it all clear to everyone. Since there is not, there many worldviews, made up by each believer, with each believer having his own god at the center.
---atheist on 5/22/12


Yes, people are different. In general, you can see what humans are capable of believing. Look at how certain Aborigines can think a giant rock is a dead lizard's bone, for just one example. Many of us easily believed in Santa Claus.

So, people can believe anything they are told, about the Bible, too.

I would say that what you see in public may not represent how God has His people living their real lives. But we have a way of thinking that what is public or in a history book must be what represents something or a group.
---willie_c: on 5/22/12


See 1 Corinthians 14:33, "God is not the author of confusion.." The main cause of so many interpretations and handling of God's instructions to his people is Satan, who uses the complicated genetic intelligence of mankind to cause doubt wherever possible. Remember the Holy Spirit in your heart and truth will come.
---Geraldine on 5/22/12


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.