Six biblical truths about money...

Discussion in 'Religion and Spirituality' started by expiated, Mar 24, 2019.

  1. expiated


    This depends on whether one lends any credence to the contention that the fine-tuning of the universe exhibits precisely the features (extreme improbability and functional specification) that invariably trigger an awareness of, and justify an inference to, intelligent design.

    It also depends on whether one recognizes the Bible as being unique among all written text ever penned on the Earth. Was it truly inspired by God? Scripture said, "then the Lord, your God, will bring back your exiles, and He will have mercy upon you. He will once again gather you from all the nations, where the Lord, your God, had dispersed you."

    No other peoples in the history of the world who were conquered and exiled from their lands managed to return and reestablish their nation hundreds of years later—only Israel. How is it that this occurred with they alone, just as the God of Abraham promised?

    Scripture also promised a Messiah who would sacrifice Himself for the sins of mankind. Yeshua said, "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about Me, yet you refuse to come to Me that you may have life."

    Indeed, if the Bible was not inspired by God, how could it "know" hundreds of years in advance that the Messiah would be called a Nazareen, that Galilee would witness His blessings, that He would be born in Bethlehem, that He would be called out of Egypt, that they would pierce his hands and feet? And on and on and on the prophesies go...

    Yeshua also remarked that "anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father," and He claimed that "I and the Father are one." On another occasion He said, "Believe in God; believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go and prepare a place for you?"

    If God is not real, where did the Messiah get the power to heal and perform miracles? When His disciples claimed He rose from the dead, why didn't the Romans or the religious leaders simply produce His body and put an end to the "rumor?" If what He claimed was false, then Christ was insane. So why is it that even atheists quote Him so much?

    There is one thing after another I can point to that give me reason to believe in the existence of Yahweh. But about the only thing I can point to as evidence that I came from from a monkey who came from nonliving matter that popped into existence from a universe that organized itself out of total chaos are the slight variations observed in the beaks of finches living on the Galapagos Islands. I do not find this evidence as compelling as God the Son having Himself appeared here on the Earth.
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2019
    #41     Apr 4, 2019
  2. userque


    You are preaching to the choir. :)

    The point of my post was to say that the human mind cannot understand how an enormous universe can pop out of thin ... nothingness.

    Nor can the human mind understand how a being, God, can exist since the beginning of everything/nothing.

    God does not explain his origin. Was he simply there ... before anything? How is that possible? Was he created?

    The human mind has no science; no way to even comprehend how something can come from nothing; nor how something, or someone, or some being, can simply have always existed--without being created/born.

    Our own science says energy cannot be created nor destroyed. Yet, scientist also say that all of the energy (and matter, E=mc^2) in the universe popped out of nothingness.

    My point also was, more simply:

    Skeptics of a belief in God, because his origin can't be explained logically, should take note that a big bang from nothingness is also inexplicable...and violates current scientific laws.

    One can choose to believe that a universe popped out of nowhere, and complex life just formed.

    Or one can believe that an intelligent, powerful being was mysteriously just ...there... and created a universe that certainly appears to have been intelligently designed. There's more that I could say about just how intelligent the design is (DNA, mathematical constants, how cells mysteriously know exactly what to become as they divide from one cell into a human being, etc.), but I too would be preaching to the choir.
    #42     Apr 4, 2019
    GRULSTMRNN and expiated like this.
  3. stu


    I disagree. Within the disciplines of theoretical physics and cosmology for example, some human minds have been able to do exactly that.

    My opinion is it isn't reasonable to say a working scientific theory such as big bang based upon the scientific method and conforming to the laws of physics, is not 'more logical' than mythical God concepts formed around superstition.
    #43     Apr 4, 2019
  4. userque


    I agree, that we disagree. :)
    #44     Apr 4, 2019
  5. Sig


    :banghead: Let me guess, product of a christian school "education" (I speak from experience). I would highly recommend you take a course on the scientific method, the kind usually taught in middle school science classes. The big bang is a scientific theory (just like everything in science, including gravity). It is the best consensus explanation we currently have for what we observe. No one "believes" in it, in fact those most involved in studying the origins of the universe will tell you that it is certainly wrong in at least several key areas and potentially or even probably entirely wrong. They actually spend their lives trying to figure out which parts are wrong to improve our understanding of what happened at the beginning of the universe.
    That the absolute opposite of christian fundamentalists. They believe that the bible is infallible on a word for word basis (bizzarially based on the words laid down in 1611, no newer no older for you KJV zealots). You don't and in fact can't question the truth of what is written there, you would never admit that there's even the possibility that it could be wrong (I know, I was raised as one and left because of this belief, among other backwards things). It is faith based belief, the opposite of science no matter how hard you try to misunderstand what science is. There's nothing wrong with faith to help you through life. But you'd think that since that whole Galileo thing you would have learned the idiocy of mixing what belongs in the realm of faith and what belongs in the realm of science.

    By the way, before you decide you understand something like quantum physics you may want to actually spend a little time learning about it. You may be interested to know that in fact particles and anti-particles do appear "from nothing" all the time. All kinds of mind-bending things happen with particle physics. Some of us find that fascinating and try to learn all we can about it. Others throw up their hands and say "the human mind can't wrap around any of these concepts, I'm going to believe in something written by semi-literate goat herders 3000 years ago and modified by the ruling parties to meet their needs in the intervening time instead." What you have to ask yourself is which type of person you are?
    #45     Apr 4, 2019
    SunTrader likes this.
  6. userque


    LOL, wow. Ok, I'll bite, but at a slower pace. I've copied your post and expect to eventually reply where I will. (Multitasking.)

    No. Didn't go to any Christian schools ... well, I did in the first grade. Yes, I learned the scientific method. Right, first learned it in elementary or middle school.

    Yes, it's a theory. (Gravity is a law, actually).

    Are there any more scientific theories explaining the creation of the universe? If not, atheists have no choice but to believe the theory, or simply say, "I don't know how the universe came to be." Correct?

    So, are there any more scientific theories explaining the creation of the universe?
    #46     Apr 4, 2019
    GRULSTMRNN likes this.
  7. Sig


    No one "believes" a theory! That's the fundamental part of the scientific method that you seem to be willfully refusing to grasp. I believe that theory is the best consensus explanation of what we see at this time. One that is certainly incomplete, probably wrong in many areas, and one that we can and should continually work to refine. That's far different than believing in a theory as an immutable truth, which is exactly what fundamentalists believe about the bible. Do you seriously not recognize a difference between those two things?

    The theory of gravity is best described the the theory of relativity. Neither is an immutable truth that we believe based on faith. Neither is complete, both have known and most probably unknown issues where they fail to explain an observed phenomenon or we have not yet been able to test a predicted result. Yes, something as fundamental as gravity is indeed still a theory. I don't bring that up to get into a semantics argument, I very specifically brought it up to highlight the folly of any fundamentalist outlook on any scientifically researched field where you would have us believe that we know the entire truth without err. That's a level of hubris and arrogance that the scientific method by it's design doesn't allow for but fundamentalist religion by it's design requires.

    Again, this isn't a knock on religion or a push for atheism as you rashly assumed. Religion may well have a place for many, however it's place most certainly isn't trying to explain what lives in the realm of science which is what fundamentalists and you are doing here. Again, I have to ask you to answer my original question as to what kind of person are you?
    #47     Apr 4, 2019
  8. userque


    Again, it's a law:

    Newton's law of universal gravitation's_law_of_universal_gravitation


    Lots of people believe, or don't believe theories.

    Do you believe in the Theory of Evolution?

    What Scientists Believe

    Scientists have a new theory about where the Moon came from, and it’s unlike anything you’ve heard before

    "...At the moment, most in the scientific community believe one of a few different theories about how the Moon formed. ..."

    I believe that one can believe, or choose not to believe a theory. Again, we disagree.

    Belief, or not, in a theory has nothing to do with the scientific method. The method is performed, regardless of the performer's beliefs. A conclusion from the method is eventually obtained. That conclusion can be believed, or not, by anyone.
    #48     Apr 4, 2019
    GRULSTMRNN and expiated like this.
  9. stu


    It's a case of which is it more reasonable and sensible to believe. Myth or Math.
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2019
    #49     Apr 4, 2019
  10. userque


    I disagree. Math can't explain "nothing." There's nothing to explain. If there were truly nothing, where did the material for the big bang come from?

    If there were something there before the mystical big bang, where did that come from?

    Quantum action takes place within the known universe. Magicians make things seem to disappear and reappear all the time, but it's not what it appears to be.

    Quantum action takes place in something, the universe.

    Before the big bang, there was nothing, so there could be no quantum particles nor energy.

    It's a flawed concept: Out of pure NOTHING, out pops a big bang. What caused this big bang? Why did it happen? Where did all this matter and energy come from if there were nothing to start with?

    A fifth grade teacher told our class, "God explains why, science explains how."
    #50     Apr 4, 2019
    GRULSTMRNN likes this.