BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
 
GT Haus
View Poll Results: Do Christians drive BMWs? (Another way of asking Are you...?)
Yes, I am Christian. 151 55.31%
No, I am not Christian. 79 28.94%
I don't know if I am a Christian. 5 1.83%
What is a Christian? 15 5.49%
I was a Christian, but not anymore. 23 8.42%
I would like to be a Christian. 0 0%
Voters: 273. You may not vote on this poll

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-29-2007, 10:46 PM   #111
e90im
Brigadier General
 
e90im's Avatar
 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 3,085
iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
it's hard to describe in a way that won't make me sound silly to a person like you who doesn't believe in this stuff. maybe i'll try another time after i've thought about it.



i suppose i could agree for now



doesn't that go against rule c (if i understand it correctly)?



no, but if the bible tells the truth, then God is real. the bible says that we can see the evidence of God through the things He's created. do you really believe in the big bang theory? do you think we can put all the parts of a clock in a box, shake it up real good and we'll get a perfectly working clock from it? occam's razor: someone had to have made that clock, with purpose and intent. i think that the world being formed by some awesome feat of chance is more unlikely than God being the creator of it.

take our solar system as another example. i studied astrophysics and learned how the sun, each planet, each moon, their orbits have a perfect balance in the laws of physics. if one thing was to change it's course or it's size, it would change everything else and break that balance that has sustained life on Earth the way it does. i don't have an answer on life on other planets, but i'm pretty sure that there is no other planet in our solar system like Earth.

to me, that requires intelligent design.



i saw it before and indeed it's interesting, but my biggest objection to this movie is the person or group that made it. if you visit their website and read their list of sources, you will see that every one of their sources in regards to Christianity is anti-christian. should we trust such an obviously biased movie? it would've been more credible to have primary resources regarding these ancient characters so other people can check these sources and make their own conclusion, which is what i wanted to do but since no primary sources were cited, i couldn't find anything.

so, this movie isn't really a documentary from scholarly research. more like elementary regurgitation of "see spot run"....

i didn't read this page myself, but this site is gaining my trust a little bit. it deals with copy-cat theorists: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html

I'll reply tomorrow. Great questions you asked. Got to run now.
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
e90im is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-30-2007, 04:00 PM   #112
e90im
Brigadier General
 
e90im's Avatar
 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 3,085
iTrader: (8)

So, undetectable, zero-physical-evidence entity wouldn't qualify as real.
doesn't that go against rule c (if i understand it correctly)?


I should’ve said Personal as opposed to collective confirmed experience. Good catch.


no, but if the bible tells the truth, then God is real.

This assumption is correct

the bible says that we can see the evidence of God through the things He's created. do you really believe in the big bang theory?

I find it very plausible. It has excellent EVIDENCE behind it.

From wikipedia:
“The Big Bang is the cosmological model of the universe whose primary assertion is that the universe has expanded into its current state from a primordial condition of enormous density and temperature.

Theoretical support for the Big Bang comes from mathematical models, called Friedmann models. These models show that a Big Bang is consistent with general relativity and with the cosmological principle; which states that the properties of the universe should be independent of position or orientation.

Observational evidence for the Big Bang includes the analysis of the spectrum of light from galaxies, which reveal a shift towards longer wavelengths proportional to each galaxy's distance in a relationship described by Hubble's law. Combined with the evidence that observers located anywhere in the universe make similar observations (the Copernican principle), this suggests that space itself is expanding. The next most important observational evidence was the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation in 1964. This had been predicted as a relic from when hot ionized plasma of the early universe first cooled sufficiently to form neutral hydrogen and allow space to become transparent to light, and its discovery led to general acceptance among physicists that the Big Bang is the best model for the origin and evolution of the universe. A third important line of evidence is the relative proportion of light elements in the universe, which is a close match to predictions for the formation of light elements in the first minutes of the universe, according to Big Bang nucleosynthesis.”


do you think we can put all the parts of a clock in a box, shake it up real good and we'll get a perfectly working clock from it? occam's razor:

You totally missed on Occam’s razor argument. Instead of introducing a creator (which by definition has to be more complex than his product), you seek a simpler solution, like:

Maybe clock didn’t come to be in this stage, maybe evolved over hundreds of thousands of years…maybe it started as observation of daylight, nighttime, seasons, sundial…..
OK, now you’ll say: “Yes, but man “created” the clock! Therefore it has a creator.”
And, I’ll reply: Sure, the creator that exist in natural world.

someone had to have made that clock, with purpose and intent. i think that the world being formed by some awesome feat of chance is more unlikely than God being the creator of it.

Design is NOT the only alternative to chance. Natural selection is a better alternative. Natural selection explains how organized complexity can emerge from simple beginnings without any intelligent guidance.


take our solar system as another example. i studied astrophysics and learned how the sun, each planet, each moon, their orbits have a perfect balance in the laws of physics. if one thing was to change it's course or it's size, it would change everything else and break that balance that has sustained life on Earth the way it does. i don't have an answer on life on other planets, but i'm pretty sure that there is no other planet in our solar system like Earth.

Very accurate. It is known as The Goldilocks zone. So here is the question for you:
Why take such self centered egoistic look at it? Why say that it has been created just for us?
Could it be that we adopted to the environment and became what we are?
Humans also believed that Earth is the center of the Universe. Until scientific observarion proved otherwise.

to me, that requires intelligent design.

No, it doesn’t. See above.

i saw it before and indeed it's interesting, but my biggest objection to this movie is the person or group that made it. if you visit their website and read their list of sources, you will see that every one of their sources in regards to Christianity is anti-christian.

Anti Christian doesn’t mean anti Christians. Nothing agains people who believe in JC. Only against one who exploit it and prey on the gullible.
It is against the indoctrination and fallacy-filled book that people accept literally.

should we trust such an obviously biased movie? it would've been more credible to have primary resources regarding these ancient characters so other people can check these sources and make their own conclusion, which is what i wanted to do but since no primary sources were cited, i couldn't find anything.

I haven’t researched the sources of the movie, nor I say it is all factual. It certainly raises a lot of good questions, and I plan to fact-check it in the future. Just wanted to hear what you think because I respect your opinion.
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
e90im is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-02-2007, 09:31 PM   #113
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

Posts: 207
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
I should’ve said Personal as opposed to collective confirmed experience. Good catch.
in that case i disagree. real/truth has nothing to do with "collective confirmed experience" (i take this to mean that they majority agrees after seeing the evidence). just because something is the popular belief doesn't make it true.

back in the day, people thought the earth was the center of the universe and every revolves around it. they came to this conclusion using scientific observations as well so at that time, this was the most popular belief. however copurnicus and galileo came along and said something different, that the sun is the center of the earth. and sooner or later, we came to accept this to be the proper thought.

so what is it then? does truth change? or does it stay the same and our perception of truth changes? there's a big difference and may have huge consequences.

this leads me to talk about the whole thought of relative truth. a lot of people say "you can believe what you believe, and i can believe what i believe and we're all right." this is specifically applied to religion, when people don't really want to make a choice on the issue.

so let's think about this for a moment. can we all be right? if truth is truth, regardless of what we think then there is no way for everyone to be right. either 1 group of thought is right, or we're all wrong and have yet to discover the truth.

so my point here is, when we're talking about eternal consequences, a choice must be made.

Quote:
I find it very plausible. It has excellent EVIDENCE behind it.
from what i understand from the wikipedia quote you gave, there isn't an overwhelming amount of evidence that suggest the big bang theory holds more water than intelligent design. could not God have created the universe in the same way? all we have are observations, just like how the folks back in the day had observations to show that the sun revolves around the earth. theories always change especially as you discover more and more about the natural universe.

Quote:
You totally missed on Occam’s razor argument. Instead of introducing a creator (which by definition has to be more complex than his product), you seek a simpler solution, like:

Maybe clock didn’t come to be in this stage, maybe evolved over hundreds of thousands of years…maybe it started as observation of daylight, nighttime, seasons, sundial…..
OK, now you’ll say: “Yes, but man “created” the clock! Therefore it has a creator.”
And, I’ll reply: Sure, the creator that exist in natural world.

Design is NOT the only alternative to chance. Natural selection is a better alternative. Natural selection explains how organized complexity can emerge from simple beginnings without any intelligent guidance.
bleh. evolution. there's just too many things out there on this that i can't keep it all straight. i believe in evolution. i believe in natural selection, survival of the fittest, microevolution. but i have trouble believing that evolution can produce new species. that a single cell organism can evolve into the complex world we live in today. i won't say it's impossible.. but ever since i heard it in jr high (my pre-christian years), i had a hard time believing that.

Quote:
Very accurate. It is known as The Goldilocks zone. So here is the question for you:
Why take such self centered egoistic look at it? Why say that it has been created just for us?
Could it be that we adopted to the environment and became what we are?
Humans also believed that Earth is the center of the Universe. Until scientific observarion proved otherwise.
1. why is it egotistical to believe the the earth is a very special planet? that was really my only point.

2. so you agree that what we know from science can change and is hardly absolute truth?

Quote:
Anti Christian doesn’t mean anti Christians.
i'm describing the sources as anti christian. here's the deal.. there's a difference between studying something to form an opinion and studying something to support your opinion. i don't know about the authors of the sources, but i'm sure the producer of that video is an anti-christian.

so to end this post, all i wanted to point out is that there is no reason that science and faith is mutually exclusive. there is no reason that a person of spiritual faith is foolish and does not use science, logic and reason to believe what they believe because men of pure science use just as much faith into their data and observations. in essence, you're not better than me, and i'm not better than you.

i was watching "a beautiful mind" the other night and heard this dialogue that, for me, is so true to our discussion.

Alicia: How big is the universe?
Nash: Infinite.
Alicia: How do you know?
Nash: I know because all the data indicates it's infinite.
Alicia: But it hasn't been proven yet.
Nash: No.
Alicia: You haven't seen it.
Nash: No.
Alicia: How do you know for sure?
Nash: I don't, I just believe it.
Alicia: It's the same with love I guess.

addendum: there's this really great book by CS Lewis called Mere Chtistianity. it explains the christian faith with easy to follow reason. it's not preachy at all and if you read it, you'd at least understand why christians believe and how they get to that point.
its ray den is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-05-2007, 12:59 AM   #114
e90im
Brigadier General
 
e90im's Avatar
 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 3,085
iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
in that case i disagree. real/truth has nothing to do with "collective confirmed experience" (i take this to mean that they majority agrees after seeing the evidence). just because something is the popular belief doesn't make it true.

back in the day, people thought the earth was the center of the universe and every revolves around it. they came to this conclusion using scientific observations as well so at that time, this was the most popular belief. however copurnicus and galileo came along and said something different, that the sun is the center of the earth. and sooner or later, we came to accept this to be the proper thought.

so what is it then? does truth change? or does it stay the same and our perception of truth changes? there's a big difference and may have huge consequences.

this leads me to talk about the whole thought of relative truth. a lot of people say "you can believe what you believe, and i can believe what i believe and we're all right." this is specifically applied to religion, when people don't really want to make a choice on the issue.

so let's think about this for a moment. can we all be right? if truth is truth, regardless of what we think then there is no way for everyone to be right. either 1 group of thought is right, or we're all wrong and have yet to discover the truth.

so my point here is, when we're talking about eternal consequences, a choice must be made.



from what i understand from the wikipedia quote you gave, there isn't an overwhelming amount of evidence that suggest the big bang theory holds more water than intelligent design. could not God have created the universe in the same way? all we have are observations, just like how the folks back in the day had observations to show that the sun revolves around the earth. theories always change especially as you discover more and more about the natural universe.



bleh. evolution. there's just too many things out there on this that i can't keep it all straight. i believe in evolution. i believe in natural selection, survival of the fittest, microevolution. but i have trouble believing that evolution can produce new species. that a single cell organism can evolve into the complex world we live in today. i won't say it's impossible.. but ever since i heard it in jr high (my pre-christian years), i had a hard time believing that.



1. why is it egotistical to believe the the earth is a very special planet? that was really my only point.

2. so you agree that what we know from science can change and is hardly absolute truth?



i'm describing the sources as anti christian. here's the deal.. there's a difference between studying something to form an opinion and studying something to support your opinion. i don't know about the authors of the sources, but i'm sure the producer of that video is an anti-christian.

so to end this post, all i wanted to point out is that there is no reason that science and faith is mutually exclusive. there is no reason that a person of spiritual faith is foolish and does not use science, logic and reason to believe what they believe because men of pure science use just as much faith into their data and observations. in essence, you're not better than me, and i'm not better than you.

i was watching "a beautiful mind" the other night and heard this dialogue that, for me, is so true to our discussion.

Alicia: How big is the universe?
Nash: Infinite.
Alicia: How do you know?
Nash: I know because all the data indicates it's infinite.
Alicia: But it hasn't been proven yet.
Nash: No.
Alicia: You haven't seen it.
Nash: No.
Alicia: How do you know for sure?
Nash: I don't, I just believe it.
Alicia: It's the same with love I guess.

addendum: there's this really great book by CS Lewis called Mere Chtistianity. it explains the christian faith with easy to follow reason. it's not preachy at all and if you read it, you'd at least understand why christians believe and how they get to that point.
OK, cool believe what you want… You defy reason and believe in supernatural.
Just wait when you die and meet Allah instead of JC!!! Are you telling me that 1.5 billion Muslim are delusional and are going to hell???
How about other religions? Are those people out of their mind?

Don’t answer this publicly, because I don’t care. Just think about it.


You'll go to meet JC after you die, and I'll go to hell. I will be tortured and I will burn forever because I did not believe at him. Everything else can be forgiven except non-belief. Very honorable system indeed. If that’s the deal, I wouldn’t believe if Jesus showed up tomorrow.

I have no desire, nor the time to read religious crap. It's ultimately all about fear, guilt trip, obedience to authority and exploitation of the gullible. If I want a good fantasy book, I'll look elsewhere.

I can understand religious people that were indoctrinated as kids, but people that became believers later in life amaze me. You believe only to feel better about yourself and to ride the high moral horse.

As of now, I will stop debating you, because I don't time to educate you for free. If you desire there is abundance of science all around you. But science is not easy, so just go back to your church and have someone interpret the bible for you. You are scared to live life without your Skydaddy and so be it.
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
e90im is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-05-2007, 01:34 AM   #115
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

Posts: 207
iTrader: (0)

why are you so angry? did i hit a tender spot somewhere in there?

i thought we had something good going. i gave you the time of day when no one else would because of your lack of respect. we were actually getting somewhere with this disparity you seem to have between science and religion. what happened?

if you're going to back to being disrespectful, then i suppose the conversations ends here. adios!
its ray den is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-05-2007, 11:55 PM   #116
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

Posts: 207
iTrader: (0)

nevermind...
its ray den is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-06-2007, 01:16 AM   #117
ChineseGuy
QuickShifter
 
ChineseGuy's Avatar
 
Drives: Black E90
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: North Pole

Posts: 1,500
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
nevermind...
+1
ChineseGuy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-07-2007, 11:41 PM   #118
e90im
Brigadier General
 
e90im's Avatar
 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 3,085
iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomwid View Post
Religion is the root of all evil. 90% of the worlds conflicts are due to religion. Weak minded people need religion in order to sustain themselves, by ways of hope or faith in a God that will take them to that special place.

Christians don't understand what they practice is no different than what terrorists on the other side of the ocean practice.

It's also a proven fact that religion hinders progress. Just like the arguments you stated above, can you imagine what scientists had to go through back in the day?

Thanks for stepping in bro.
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
e90im is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-08-2007, 07:54 AM   #119
dr335is
Brigadier General
 
Drives: GTI
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX

Posts: 4,973
iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
nevermind...
Translation = I have no f***ing idea how to respond to this...I'm gonna go pray, that will solve it all...like it did many times before...
dr335is is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-15-2007, 05:31 PM   #120
scottwww
Brigadier General
 
scottwww's Avatar
 
Drives: 07 BMW 335i Cpe, 05 Mazda RX8
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA

Posts: 4,759
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via MSN to scottwww
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloridaBoy View Post
Even the most hateful and vile hearts have been changed by the Gospel, as proven by testimonies like Ergun Caner, don't miss this powerful and funny three part series, it will bless your heart. I have shared this with Muslims on other forums—very powerful:


That's a good testimony. But too bad about his father.
scottwww is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-18-2007, 09:32 PM   #121
e90im
Brigadier General
 
e90im's Avatar
 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 3,085
iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottwww View Post
That's a good testimony. But too bad about his father.
scottwww, your avatar looks like a frog in a desert would, after smoking 'shrooms. What'cha smoking?
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
e90im is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-18-2007, 09:39 PM   #122
scottwww
Brigadier General
 
scottwww's Avatar
 
Drives: 07 BMW 335i Cpe, 05 Mazda RX8
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA

Posts: 4,759
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via MSN to scottwww
Quote:
Originally Posted by e90im View Post
scottwww, your avatar looks like a frog in a desert would, after smoking 'shrooms. What'cha smoking?
No smoke involved here. He's just saying, "Peace." Maybe I should change it to the hookah smoking caterpillar from the chop stock thread. But, I think peace represents my character better.
scottwww is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-19-2007, 01:19 AM   #123
Neurorad
Major
 
Neurorad's Avatar
 
Drives: 330xi 6MT Blk/Blk SP
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Location, Location

Posts: 1,212
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
So to end this post, all i wanted to point out is that there is no reason that science and faith are mutually exclusive. There is no reason that a person of spiritual faith is foolish and does not use science, logic and reason to believe what they believe because men of pure science use just as much faith into their data and observations. In essence, you're not better than me, and i'm not better than you.
It's clear that many highly intelligent people are Christians.

Belief in magic and gods has been around since the evolution of homo sapiens, 250,000 years ago. That's only 2500 centuries, a drop in the bucket compared with the age of the earth (formed 4,500,000,000 years ago). Oldest life forms appeared ~4,000,000,000 years ago (that's counting to a million 4,000 times BTW).

The knowledge that there is no such thing as god is a hard pill to swallow, even for the brightest.

It will be another million years (or longer) before everyone realizes that belief in god = belief in magic.

Also, anyone realize how big the universe is? I need to go look up those ASTOUNDING numbers again...
Neurorad is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 10:47 AM   #124
e90im
Brigadier General
 
e90im's Avatar
 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 3,085
iTrader: (8)

Originally Posted by its ray den
So to end this post, all i wanted to point out is that there is no reason that science and faith are mutually exclusive. There is no reason that a person of spiritual faith is foolish and does not use science, logic and reason to believe what they believe because men of pure science use just as much faith into their data and observations. In essence, you're not better than me, and i'm not better than you.

I think that science and religion are ABSOLUTELY MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. I also acknowledge that both can find home in a human being. 7% of US Academy of Science members are religious. This is an astounding fact. It proves that education will NOT nullify religious need in a human being.
But all these scientists will NOT debate biblical claims, because they know better. They know what faith is. Blind and private belief in supernatural without evidence.

All that being said, if religious claims are scrutinized by applying scientific methods, religion can't sustain existence.

I think it is best for the religious to simply say: I will NOT debate or reason you non-believers. I believe without proof. End of story.
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
e90im is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 01:14 PM   #125
scottwww
Brigadier General
 
scottwww's Avatar
 
Drives: 07 BMW 335i Cpe, 05 Mazda RX8
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA

Posts: 4,759
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via MSN to scottwww
Quote:
Originally Posted by e90im View Post
Originally Posted by its ray den
So to end this post, all i wanted to point out is that there is no reason that science and faith are mutually exclusive. There is no reason that a person of spiritual faith is foolish and does not use science, logic and reason to believe what they believe because men of pure science use just as much faith into their data and observations. In essence, you're not better than me, and i'm not better than you.

I think that science and religion are ABSOLUTELY MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. I also acknowledge that both can find home in a human being. 7% of US Academy of Science members are religious. This is an astounding fact. It proves that education will NOT nullify religious need in a human being.
But all these scientists will NOT debate biblical claims, because they know better. They know what faith is. Blind and private belief in supernatural without evidence.

All that being said, if religious claims are scrutinized by applying scientific methods, religion can't sustain existence.

I think it is best for the religious to simply say: I will NOT debate or reason you non-believers. I believe without proof. End of story.
The faithful have all the proof they need. Even you as a scientifically minded person accept much that is not proven to you... or you wouldn't believe much of anything at all. You rely on faith in science. You do not require proof for your belief system. Many have had proof in matters relating to God, yet not scientific proof. That is a different realm. No proof of God is adequate for an atheist.

You could be right that it is better for Christians to simply say: I will NOT debate or reason with atheists. But that would be leaving the lost to burn in hell. Sometimes we try to help those who are in need even when they don't want help.
scottwww is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 05:53 PM   #126
e90im
Brigadier General
 
e90im's Avatar
 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 3,085
iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottwww View Post
The faithful have all the proof they need. Even you as a scientifically minded person accept much that is not proven to you... or you wouldn't believe much of anything at all. You rely on faith in science. You do not require proof for your belief system. Many have had proof in matters relating to God, yet not scientific proof. That is a different realm. No proof of God is adequate for an atheist.

You could be right that it is better for Christians to simply say: I will NOT debate or reason with atheists. But that would be leaving the lost to burn in hell. Sometimes we try to help those who are in need even when they don't want help.
Science gets repeatable results. Science searches for truth. I don't "believe" in science. I practice it by thinking critically, asking for evidence and asking questions. That's why humans are where they are. Not because we accepted blindly things at face value.

Religion had it their way during dark ages.

What if Muslims are right and you and I both go to hell?
Attached Images
 
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
e90im is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 06:41 PM   #127
scottwww
Brigadier General
 
scottwww's Avatar
 
Drives: 07 BMW 335i Cpe, 05 Mazda RX8
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA

Posts: 4,759
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via MSN to scottwww
Quote:
Originally Posted by e90im View Post
Science gets repeatable results. Science searches for truth. I don't "believe" in science. I practice it by thinking critically, asking for evidence and asking questions. That's why humans are where they are. Not because we accepted blindly things at face value.

Religion had it their way during dark ages.

What if Muslims are right and you and I both go to hell?
In case it hasn't come through in any of my other posts, I have no quarrel with science. It has produced useful results.

What is odd is that one such as yourself who insists upon a proof for that which does not need scientific proof, will still accept much from science and also the unscientific world that is unproven. If you did not then you could not function.

It all amounts to the fact that you rejected God. It has nothing to do with proof, belief, or experience. It has to do with your decision.

You can change that decision. It does not have to be a permanent encumbrance.
scottwww is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 09:57 PM   #128
e90im
Brigadier General
 
e90im's Avatar
 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

Posts: 3,085
iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottwww View Post
In case it hasn't come through in any of my other posts, I have no quarrel with science. It has produced useful results.

What is odd is that one such as yourself who insists upon a proof for that which does not need scientific proof, will still accept much from science and also the unscientific world that is unproven. If you did not then you could not function.

It all amounts to the fact that you rejected God. It has nothing to do with proof, belief, or experience. It has to do with your decision.

You can change that decision. It does not have to be a permanent encumbrance.
So you admit that there is no proof. All I need is to decide?

scottwww, do you believe in Santa? I'm not mocking, serious question.
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
e90im is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-23-2007, 04:16 PM   #129
scottwww
Brigadier General
 
scottwww's Avatar
 
Drives: 07 BMW 335i Cpe, 05 Mazda RX8
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA

Posts: 4,759
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via MSN to scottwww
Quote:
Originally Posted by e90im View Post
So you admit that there is no proof. All I need is to decide?

scottwww, do you believe in Santa? I'm not mocking, serious question.
There is plenty of proof. But that which is proof to you would likely not be proof to me. What is proof to me is likely of no concern to you. To my knowledge there isn't a proof that science would confirm.

A decision is the first baby step. The yearning for something spiritual in your life comes much earlier than the decision, just as conception takes place long before the first baby step. Perhaps that conception has already taken place in your soul.

Of course I do not believe in Santa as in Jolly ol' Saint Nick that lives at the North Pole and rides around in a sleigh with eight tiny reindeer. There likely was a St. Nicholas who was the one recognized by the Roman Catholic Church. I don't remember any time that I did believe in Santa because I was not raised a Christian, and my older siblings made it plain there was no such thing.

Last night, my family and I watched Miracle on 34th Street (the newest one in color). I have tended to distance myself from any association with Santa as a symbol of Christmas. I have never promoted Santa to my child. My wife, however has promoted Santa. This has actually been a thing that I have struggled with. I haven't wanted my child to believe in that which is universally recognized to be false before the child leaves grammar school. Believing in Santa would seem to build the idea that you can believe in something good that turns out to be a fraud.

In watching this movie, it occurred to me that believing in Santa as a child opens the human mind to accepting as reality that which does not come with undeniable proof. Perhaps having never believed in a Santa Claus is why it was so difficult for me to come to a belief in God and a relationship with Jesus. I was underdeveloped in the area of my being where the Holy Spirit dwells. Maybe this is why it was such a shock to me and all who I knew when I followed Jesus out of that life.

Last edited by scottwww; 12-23-2007 at 06:23 PM.
scottwww is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-24-2007, 11:55 AM   #130
FloridaBoy
First Lieutenant
 
FloridaBoy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2005 Z4 3.oi
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Florida

Posts: 376
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomwid View Post
Christians don't understand what they practice is no different than what terrorists on the other side of the ocean practice.
Really, okay please show me some Baptists who are training 7 year old kids to blow themselves up while taking out a bunch of Muslims in a shopping mall, so they can escape the scales of judgement and make it to heaven per their doctrine.

Show me a 65 year old Presbyterian grandma who is training her grandaughter to cap off a pipe bomb on a crowded bus in the name of Jesus, so she can be a "good martyr," and make God proud.

Show me a group of blood-crazed Lutheran evangelists who have publicly declared "war on the great Satan, Islam" and who are actively teaching their kids to hate Jews with text books and songs in their private schools as part of the curriculum. I'm waiting...
__________________
2005 3.0i, Black Sapphire, SMG, Navigation, Heated leather, iPod w/Dice, Carver Subs, Sport, Foamless SG, 3M Clear Bra, Sirius, 18 inch 107's

FloridaBoy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-24-2007, 11:58 AM   #131
FloridaBoy
First Lieutenant
 
FloridaBoy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2005 Z4 3.oi
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Florida

Posts: 376
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e90im View Post
So you admit that there is no proof. All I need is to decide?

scottwww, do you believe in Santa? I'm not mocking, serious question.
Where is your proof of how the world began?
Not theory, mind you... proof. I'm waiting....
__________________
2005 3.0i, Black Sapphire, SMG, Navigation, Heated leather, iPod w/Dice, Carver Subs, Sport, Foamless SG, 3M Clear Bra, Sirius, 18 inch 107's

FloridaBoy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-24-2007, 12:02 PM   #132
FloridaBoy
First Lieutenant
 
FloridaBoy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2005 Z4 3.oi
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Florida

Posts: 376
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e90im View Post
Originally Posted by its ray den
So to end this post, all i wanted to point out is that there is no reason that science and faith are mutually exclusive. There is no reason that a person of spiritual faith is foolish and does not use science, logic and reason to believe what they believe because men of pure science use just as much faith into their data and observations. In essence, you're not better than me, and i'm not better than you.

I think that science and religion are ABSOLUTELY MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. I also acknowledge that both can find home in a human being. 7% of US Academy of Science members are religious. This is an astounding fact. It proves that education will NOT nullify religious need in a human being.
But all these scientists will NOT debate biblical claims, because they know better. They know what faith is. Blind and private belief in supernatural without evidence.

All that being said, if religious claims are scrutinized by applying scientific methods, religion can't sustain existence.

I think it is best for the religious to simply say: I will NOT debate or reason you non-believers. I believe without proof. End of story.
Atheists also believe without proof.
As for science...


Did you know many 20th century high rise buildings don't acknowledge having a 13th floor? Do you know why? Modern man certainly is scientific isn't he?

The real question is; how scientific would we be today without the efforts of Christians? Perhaps you have heard of Issac Newton?

Issac Newton is regarded as one of the greatest scientists in history, and one of his personal passions was the Bible. Newton wrote, "When I wrote my treastise about our System I had an eye upon such Principles as might work with considering men for the belief of a Deity and nothing can rejoice me more than to find it useful for that purpose."

Certainly Johannes Kepler ranks as a shining star in the history of science. This Bible believing, Christian mathematician and astronomer discovered fundamental laws of nature that have stood the test of time and are still widely used today. Kepler is considered the Father of Celestial Mechanics and Modern Optics. Even today, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory navigates spacecraft around the solar system using Kepler’s Laws, and astronomers routinely speak of Keplerian orbits not only for the solar system but for stars orbiting galaxies, and for galaxies orbiting clusters and superclusters.* The whole universe obeys Kepler’s Laws, or as he would have preferred to say, obeys God’s laws that he merely uncovered—as Kepler put it, “Since we astronomers are priests of the highest God in regard to the book of nature, it befits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God.”

How about Kelvin? A mathematical physisist, engineer, and outstanding leader in the physical sciences of the 19th century. His important work still stands today in the analysis of electricity and thermodynamics, and did much to unify the emerging discipline of physics in its modern form. He is widely known for developing the Kelvin scale of absolute temperature measurement.

Consider Sir Francis Bacon—developed the Scientific Method, considered by many historians to be the “founder of modern science,” and professed allegiance to Christianity and belief in Christian doctrines. A devout Anglican remembered with a great scientific mind, who wrote, "Knowledge is the rich storehouse for the glory of the Creator and the relief of man's estate.... a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion." In his will, he included this final prayer: "When I thought most of peace and honor, thy hand [was] heavy on me, and hath humbled me, according to thy former loving kindness. … Just are thy judgments upon my sins. … Be merciful unto me for my Savior's sake, and receive me into thy bosom."

How about Charles Townes? In 1964 he won the Nobel Prize in Physics and in 1966 he wrote "The Convergence of Science and Religion."

Then there is Robert Boyd, (1922-2004) Vice President of the Royal Astronomical Society. He lectured on faith being a founder of the "Research Scientists' Christian Fellowship" and an important member of its predecessor, Christians in Science. He was director of the UCL Mullard Space Science Laboratory from 1965 to 1983, and widely regarded as the father of space science in the UK.

How about Francis Collins? He is the director of the US National Human Genome Research Institute. He has also written on religious matters in articles and in Faith and the Human Genome he states the importance to him of "the literal and historical Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, which is the cornerstone of what I believe." Collins also states, "After twenty-eight years as a believer, the Moral Law stands out for me as the strongest signpost of God." He also has a recent book titled The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.

Who could forget Albert Einstein—often wrongly considered an atheist, who said regarding the historical Jesus, "As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene... no one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life." Einstein said of the Creator, "The deeper one penetrates into nature's secrets, the greater becomes one's respect for God."

What about Robert T. Bakker, the Christian paleantologist who wears a cowboy hat and was caricatured in the movie Jurassic Park... Bakker was responsible for initiating the ongoing "dinosaur Renaissance" in paleontological studies, beginning with his article "Dinosaur Renaissance" in Scientific American, April 1975.

Perhaps you've heard of James Irwin, this dedicated, "ignorant Christian" earned a Master of Science in aeronautical engineering and instrumentation engineering from the University of Michigan. Upon graduation from the Naval Academy, he was commissioned in the United States Air Force. Prior to joining NASA, he was Chief of the Advanced Requirements Branch at Headquarters Air Defense Command. Irwin then went on to become a member of the Apollo 15 mission and the eighth man to walk on the Moon and the first man to drive a lunar rover on the Moon. After all that, he ended up starting a ministry promoting the of all things... the Bible.

Then there is Lambert Dolphin, a brilliant physicist holding a degree with high honors in physics and distinction in mathematics from San Diego State University, and some 30 years on the the staff of SRI International (formerly Stanford Research Institute). In Lambert's article, "What Holds the Universe together?," this Bible believer contemplates Colossians Chapter 1 and writes, "This passage strongly suggests that the active power of God is behind the mysterious strong force that holds every atomic nucleus together."

How about a Christian named Rustum Roy, one of the world's foremost materials scientists, holds three chairs at the Pennsylvania State University, five professorships and has authored over 1,000 published papers, articles and books; basically a list of scientific achievements and contributions as long as your arm.

How about Dr. Maurice Rawlings, a respected cardiologist who watched one of his patients drop dead during a stress test and then come back to life with his hair standing on end, screaming about not wanting to go back to Hell. Rawlings was a devout atheist at the time, but ended up becoming a Christian and writing a book called "Beyond Death's Door," relating his startling experiences in the E.R. with patients who claim to experience life after clinical death in the hospital...

Let's not forget the 600+ voting scientists of the Creation Research Society (voting membership requires at least an earned master's degree in a recognized area of science).

The list goes on, and the point I am making is; the only thing more dumb than the idea that Christianity and true science are somehow incompatible is the obsurd notion that all "real" scientists must be athiests. To the contrary; a relationship with the Creator is the best foundation for understanding the creation.
__________________
2005 3.0i, Black Sapphire, SMG, Navigation, Heated leather, iPod w/Dice, Carver Subs, Sport, Foamless SG, 3M Clear Bra, Sirius, 18 inch 107's

FloridaBoy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:17 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST