What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

the death of Christianity

  • #81
No, he is without beginning or end. Always existed since before time and will never cease to be. Very paradoxical.

No, men are not meant to be the head of the household. It can me a patriarchal family, matriarchal, or a 50/50 split. Mine for example would be matriarchal. Saying that a man is supposed to be the head of the family is very sexist. It was a sexist society back then, and that's why sexism is written into the bible, because man wrote it.
 
  • #82
Where do you think this political control comes from?

mob rule?
not all political control comes from religion. Look at our government, sure some of it might be a little contoled (corrupted) by religion, but some other things are just common sense.
 
  • #83
No, he is without beginning or end. Always existed since before time and will never cease to be. Very paradoxical.

yes very paradoxical indeed. But if he always existed since before time and before is relating to something measured in time then that doesn't make any sense.

How would we know this? what is he made of? energy? atoms? If so then where did they come from? There is no true way to prove God's existance, but then again there is no way to prove that God is nonexistant.
 
  • #84
No, it doesn't make any sense. But I guess calculus doesn't make any sense to a hamster.







This is Ephesians 5:22-33. It's really fine, except for telling women to be submissive and saying the husband is the head of the wife, which may be interpreted ( and I do) as the husband is superior to the wide. It's horribly sexist.

22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30for we are members of his body. 31"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." 32This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
 
  • #85
No, they came together from hydrocarbon containing compounds :) A hydrocarbon is made primarily from, you guessed it, hydrogen and carbon. Impure hydrocarbons can be bonded to sulfur, nitrogen, etc. I do believe God made all of us. BUT I believe it took millions of years through evolution, not 24 hours. Why do you put "organic" in quotes? A molecule that contains carbon is organic. God making everything via evolution is a theory called theistic evolution.

The point I was trying to get at is that you can't fathom it being possible or being realistic that God created things into existence in an instance. That's belittling God.

I don't believe I said God was ignorant? I'd love for you to show me exactly where I called God Ignorant. If believe I was talking about and specified people thousands of years ago. God never told us anything. The Bible did. It was inspired by God, written by fallible man. If we should do what God tell us to do and think, according to the bible of course, we would stone our children for disrespecting their parents, kill people for picking up sticks on the sabbath, etc. Come to think of it, everyone who does light work on Saturday should die.

God did tell us something....and it wasn't to stone our children. Take another look.

People do respect darwinism, what people? Pretty much the modern scientific community. Jeez, maybe that's why it's in every textbook in ever secular school in America? Maybe not the Messiah College.

Good science like what? Show me a better example that makes more scientific sense than evolution. I said scientific sense, so anything involving any deities whatsoever is not credible.

I'm sorry wrong word, I meant to say evolution not Darwinism.
 
  • #86
I'm sorry wrong word, I meant to say evolution not Darwinism

they also respect Evolution as much as any other aspect of science, unless if you were refering people to Christians. If so then what am I? a heathen?
 
  • #87
mob rule?
not all political control comes from religion. Look at our government, sure some of it might be a little contoled (corrupted) by religion, but some other things are just common sense.

Your not even talking about what me and Ktulu were discussing...
 
  • #88
they also respect Evolution as much as any other aspect of science, unless if you were refering people to Christians. If so then what am I? a heathen?

Evolution is fine until it tries to dictate origin, hence Darwinism.
 
  • #89
Oh no, I do believe it's possible. Absolutely I believe it's entirely possible. I also believe that it didn't happen that way, especially with the evidence we have supporting evolution, and when you are thinking like a scientist any religious ideas are irrelevant. I'm saying when one makes so much sense, and the other makes so little sense, it's ridiculous to me, for someone to go against all logic and choose the latter, and then try to have the logical former taken out of schools. The least they can do is think about theistic-evolution.

You really make me use my noggin and look up these passages :)

Deuteronomy 21
21:18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

21:19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

21:20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

21:21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.


Leviticus 20:9

9For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
 
  • #90
Originally Posted by ktulu View Post
You are giving examples of political control not religious control.
Where do you think this political control comes from?

Originally Posted by Farmer Dave View Post
mob rule?
not all political control comes from religion. Look at our government, sure some of it might be a little contoled (corrupted) by religion, but some other things are just common sense.
Your not even talking about what me and Ktulu were discussing...

yeah, I think that I am.
You asked "where do you think that political control comes from?"
and I replied "mob rule?"

that's where I think that political control comes from
 
  • #91
No, men are not supposed to be the head of the household. It can go either way or be a 50/50 split. Mine for example is matriarchal. Men back then were sexist. Man wrote the bible. Sexism is in the bible.

This is Ephesians 5:22-33. It's really fine, except for telling women to be submissive and saying the husband is the head of the wife, which may be interpreted ( and I do) as the husband is superior to the wide. It's horribly sexist.

22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30for we are members of his body. 31"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." 32This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.


I don't think having men be the head of the household makes men superior to women. It's an equal relationship with different roles/jobs. Men and women are physically different (besides genitalia), which suites them for different roles.
 
  • #92
Where do you think this political control comes from? :poke:

Genesis 3:16 deals with the fall of Adam and Eve. If you want to talk about the gender roles then yes men are supposed to be the head of the household. That does not mean men are to treat them like animals like in some countries. Try reading Ephesians 5:22-33, it goes into great detail on the relationship between husbands and wives.

1 Timothy 12 does not exist. There are only 6 chapters in 1 Timothy.

Political control can come from many differnt sources though they all essiantally boil down to those with power convincing those without that they are better off under their control. They may use religious force, military force, political, or economic forces as long as a us-them dichotomy.

Are you sure you are refering to Islam and not Arab and Middle Eastern traditions when you talk about the mistreatment of women. Turkish women are mostly Muslims but are well educated, not treated like animals. The Qu'ran contains many protections for women such as ownership of their dowries, prohibition from men taking(marriage) them against their will, inherit property, and disaggree with their parents selection for whom they should marry. Traditional Arab culture on the other hand does not have these protections and is often confused with Islamic law.

Oh and that was supposed to be 1Timothy 2:12 sorry for the typo.
 
  • #93
yeah, I think that I am.
You asked "where do you think that political control comes from?"
and I replied "mob rule?"

that's where I think that political control comes from

Yes and that was in reply to what we were talking about earlier. You are just taking my reply and spewing it in a different tangent that is irrelevant.
 
  • #94
Sure, I can go with that, but why must a man be the head and lead? Why is a man better suited to leading? Sure, I can see how a man is better suited to digging a hole or something physical like that, theoretically of course, but leading really doesn't have anything to do with muscles.
 
  • #95
no, I do believe that that's the order that it happened, and that's the meaning of what I said.
 
  • #96
Why would God create each individual species alien to one another, so alien that they didn't share ANY of the same building blocks?
You are refering to cells, I'm refering to their form and function. If you wanted to build a human, creating an embryo with a tail is creating a creature backwards. There is absolutely no reason to give an embryo a tail just so it can eventually grow out of it.

Take a look again at the chart if you have an open mind(http://www.plyojump.com/courses/biology/images/embryos.jpg). Look how small differences start to occur in the embryos. The fish and the amphibian have a near identical embryo, same with the reptile and the bird, and lastly the two mammals. All animals are related, the embryos show this.

The Earth used to be covering with water and aquatic life(fish) flourished. The next group to rise were the amphibians as land became a place of safety as the ocean was already filled with creatures all competing. Shortly after the group known as reptiles became the rulers of the land, they were more suited to land life than the amphibians(btw, reptiles for the most part of that era = dinosaurs. You do beleive the huge bones that have been discovered and dated back milions of years aren't just God testing us, right?). After the climated change that resulted in the ice age occured, only reptiles that had the mobility to escape to warmer areas of Earth, or insulation to survive cooler seasonal temperatures(feathers) were able to survive and pass on their genes. Through evolution, higher body temperatures were required to out compete the existing organisms, hence mammals thrived and here we are now.
The point I was trying to get at is that you can't fathom it being possible or being realistic that God created things into existence in an instance.
I think the issue is after a life time of being taught the answers to life through the simplicity of something that requires faith, you have a hard time being able to fathom that we are all the results of billions of years of survival of the fittest and evolution.
 
Last edited:
  • #97
Sure, I can go with that, but why must a man be the head and lead? Why is a man better suited to leading? Sure, I can see how a man is better suited to digging a hole or something physical like that, theoretically of course, but leading really doesn't have anything to do with muscles.

Why are women better at nurturing and raising children? Why can women multi-task better than men? Why are men better at geometry than women? Why do women rely on emotions rather than rationalizing? Why are men physically stronger? Now these are all generalizations but they also have exceptions in all cases.

As for the leading question that can be largely debated but I'd have to guess it would have to do with how we process things and physical strength. Like I mentioned earlier women generally react upon emotions rather than logical rationalization. This could obviously lead to bad decision making. Now before I get called a sexist this doesn't mean that women are incapable, or they all rely upon emotions and are illogical in a given scenario, they just have a TENDENCY to react upon emotions. Men also can react upon emotions but have a TENDENCY to react with logical reasoning than feelings. This doesn't mean that the logical reasonings are GOOD ones, they can be BAD as well, same with reacting with emotions. As for physical strength, it might not be as important today but back in the day men were the protectors, workers and the breadwinners of the family.
 
  • #98
You are refering to cells, I'm refering to their form and function. If you wanted to build a human, creating an embryo with a tail is creating a creature backwards. There is absolutely no reason to give an embryo a tail just so it can eventually grow out of it.

Take a look again at the chart if you have an open mind(http://www.plyojump.com/courses/biology/images/embryos.jpg). Look how small differences start to occur in the embryos. The fish and the amphibian have a near identical embryo, same with the reptile and the bird, and lastly the two mammals. All animals are related, the embryos show this.

That isn't the first time I've seen that chart. Anyways they used to teach that human embryos had gills just like fish too. Gills or tails, vestigial organs are not proof of evolution nor are the similarities of embryos.
 
  • #99
Political control can come from many differnt sources though they all essiantally boil down to those with power convincing those without that they are better off under their control. They may use religious force, military force, political, or economic forces as long as a us-them dichotomy.

Are you sure you are refering to Islam and not Arab and Middle Eastern traditions when you talk about the mistreatment of women. Turkish women are mostly Muslims but are well educated, not treated like animals. The Qu'ran contains many protections for women such as ownership of their dowries, prohibition from men taking(marriage) them against their will, inherit property, and disaggree with their parents selection for whom they should marry. Traditional Arab culture on the other hand does not have these protections and is often confused with Islamic law.

Oh and that was supposed to be 1Timothy 2:12 sorry for the typo.

What about Sura 4:34? What happens to women who don't cover their whole body, including face and hair? Is that political?
 
  • #100
That isn't the first time I've seen that chart. Anyways they used to teach that human embryos had gills just like fish too. Gills or tails, vestigial organs are not proof of evolution nor are the similarities of embryos.
Alright, so similarities in embryos doesn't convince you, what about all the fossil evidence? How about the fact that the process has been observed in lab experiments and also in nature?

To be honest, I think you'd deny gravity if it conflicted with your religious beleifs. :p
 
Back
Top