The gods of the 21st century (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Science & Origins



Message

Carico -> The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 1:20:10 PM)

In ancient times, many people saw their rulers or emperors as gods. It's no different today except that the gods of the 21st century are scientists. They are automatically trusted to the degree that many people who call themselves Christians try to change the bible to fit what scientists say instead of the other way around. [sm=eek.gif]

These people who worship scientists as gods never challenge scientists who are fallible human beings. Instead, they defend everything scientists claim no matter how impossible, ridiculous, or how much they contradict the bible and they change God's word instead.

Well I got news for you guys, the words of scientists will pass into the abyss as soon as scientists die and are replaced by new scientists with new theories. They will eventually die as well along with the words of those who abandoned God's word to follow them. Then all that will be left are God's words which are living and eternal.

That means that all that will echo throughout eternity is Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus and all of the rest of the bible and whatever else God reveals to us in heaven. And whatever else he reveals to us in heaven will not contradict what he's told us on earth. So one will no longer hear that the world is 4.5 billion years old or that humans are monkeys and or came from monkeys. Those words will have passed into the mist and no longer will be remembered or repeated because they died along with the scientists who said them. Only God's Word is eternal. Lies are not any more than the words in science books are eternal. And the fact that the claims of scientists won't last, proves that they aren't the truth, but instead, lies. Only God's word is eternal.

So all of you who have tried to change the words in the bible to agree with secular scientists who are ruled by Satan, will be haunted by God's Word forever which you deliberately and repeatedly tried to change into words that will be long forgotten. And that, my friends, is a fact.

So I shouldn't have to defend God's word as written to those who call themselves Christians. But since I am attacked here for doing so, then I no longer want to be around the dissention that comes from standing up for the bible as written. I'll pop in occasionally to pass along the truth of the bible. Otherwise, It's too disheartening to hear how people take it upon themselves to rewrite the bible and mock God's words all in the name of Christ.



hellohellohi -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 1:42:37 PM)

If you would like, I would very interestedly follow a thread devoted to the idea that the pronouncements of science are empty. I don't think you are interested in pursuing this from a secular perspective, but such would be interesting. Too "disheartening" as opposed to "heartening?"

It would be nice to use this forum as a platform to speak in a secular mode for a secular audience out of deep Christian belief, however.



hellohellohi -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 1:44:34 PM)

quote:

And the fact that the claims of scientists won't last, proves that they aren't the truth, but instead, lies. Only God's word is eternal.


Perhaps this is a thesis on which we could found a thread and generate discussion.

What does the fact that scientific truth is enthusiastically provisional say about its "truth-value?"

:)



Carico -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 1:49:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellohellohi

If you would like, I would very interestedly follow a thread devoted to the idea that the pronouncements of science are empty. I don't think you are interested in pursuing this from a secular perspective, but such would be interesting. Too "disheartening" as opposed to "heartening?"

It would be nice to use this forum as a platform to speak in a secular mode for a secular audience out of deep Christian belief, however.

If you want to pursue that type of thread, that's up to you. It never hurts to keep repeating that only God's Word is eternal not the words of mere mortal men, because only the truth is eternal...especially when humans are inclined to believe what they can see, not the unseen which is eternal. [sm=icon_smile.gif]



Carico -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 1:55:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellohellohi

quote:

And the fact that the claims of scientists won't last, proves that they aren't the truth, but instead, lies. Only God's word is eternal.


Perhaps this is a thesis on which we could found a thread and generate discussion.

What does the fact that scientific truth is enthusiastically provisional say about its "truth-value?"

:)

Again, you can discuss it if you like. I don't need to discuss it because again, only God's word is eternal, not the words of mere mortal men. But if one claims that the words of men are eternal, they are claiming that men themselves are God because only God is eternal. That was the original sin from Eve, to become like God. And that's how she was seduced by Satan. [;)]



triode -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 1:56:52 PM)

What about medical science? What about the scientists that improve the way we live? Do you use the end results of their research even though you say they are ruled by Satan? Are questioning my salvation, faith, and saying that I am NOT a Christian?



Carico -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 1:59:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: triode

What about medical science? What about the scientists that improve the way we live? Do you use the end results of their research even though you say they are ruled by Satan? Are questioning my salvation, faith, and saying that I am NOT a Christian?


No doctor has a cure for a terminal illness. So once we humans have all died, then the deeds of medical doctors will be a thing of the past as well. That's why one needs to focus on what lasts for eternity, instead of saving our own skins on this earth. [;)]



triode -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 1:59:55 PM)

Answer the all the questions.



Carico -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:01:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: triode

Answer the all the questions.

I have as you can see. [;)]But I also said that I shouldn't have to be attacked by people who call themselves Christians for defending and believing the bible as written. So I won't answer posts that are merely attacks, not discussion of the OP.



triode -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:03:10 PM)

If your child is in the local ER, are you going to let the results of science save his life? Or will you let him die because the people who practice medical science are ruled by Satan?



EStan -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:03:39 PM)

quote:

Are questioning my salvation, faith, and saying that I am NOT a Christian?


I don't believe Carico was. Besides which, that's a violation of this boards TOS.



triode -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:07:06 PM)

Looks like this:

No doctor has a cure for a terminal illness. So once we humans have all died, then the deeds of medical doctors will be a thing of the past as well. That's why one needs to focus on what lasts for eternity, instead of saving our own skins on this earth.

may have answered one question.



Carico -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:07:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: triode

If your child is in the local ER, are you going to let the results of science save his life? Or will you let him die because the people who practice medical science are ruled by Satan?


I have no choice but to use every medical help that doctors can give me. But again, they can't save of us from death. Only Jesus can. So it's wise to remember these words of Christ; "For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?" And it never profits a man to risk his soul in order to change God's word to fit the beliefs of mortal men since the words of mortal men will disappear like a mist.



hellohellohi -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:08:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellohellohi

If you would like, I would very interestedly follow a thread devoted to the idea that the pronouncements of science are empty. I don't think you are interested in pursuing this from a secular perspective, but such would be interesting. Too "disheartening" as opposed to "heartening?"

It would be nice to use this forum as a platform to speak in a secular mode for a secular audience out of deep Christian belief, however.

If you want to pursue that type of thread, that's up to you. It never hurts to keep repeating that only God's Word is eternal not the words of mere mortal men, because only the truth is eternal...especially when humans are inclined to believe what they can see, not the unseen which is eternal. [sm=icon_smile.gif]



For instance, consider a scenario perhaps far removed from the 21-st century in which humanities gods are not merely the republican pantheon of experts in the domains but each individual, where the population of the earth is also small enough for each individual to do nearly anything they please -- because no firsthand contact with others will take place. (You can ignore this embellishment if you like.) Now, suppose physical doomsday is at hand, because of some cosmic cycle, such as the sun's, and we all know about it. What will we do? There is a book about this, "Possibility of an Island," by Michel Houellebecq that I recommend to anyone interested in bleak futurist scenarios based pretty thoughtfully in the ideas of our age, who don't mind an offensive degree of profanity, unfortunately.

Now, dialectically, I would offer one quasi-secular concept that represents at least an illusion of reaching out to the eternal. Consider this: When someone loves another, it is perhaps fair to say and perhaps universal to define such love as being without criteria. "Why do you love me?" asks the beloved. First of all, the beloved is on dialectically sketch territory, if s/he believes that inquiry expresses the tasks of love. Second of all, the queried ought to answer, "No reason." Any reason supplied will lead closer to the conclusion that the lover, husband, or wife has at base self-interest or expediency rather than, well, love. Further, to express it better:
"Why do you love me?"
"Because I prefer not to imagine a world in which you never existed."
"But what if you never met me?"
"Honestly, that is impossible to say. However, I can say that I might have had hope for you. Since I am speaking from a hypothetical plane, despite of the fact that I do have the knowledge of you, I must say, in all honesty, that I prefer not to imagine this hypothetical world without your existence: I can only imagine an existence which revolved around hope of yours."
"And what if tomorrow I die and you are indeed face with a world without my existence."
"No, not precisely. Your existence will still be a kind of fact. Physical, no. Your memory will fade. I will find someone new, no doubt. Will I see you again? I have no way to say. But will you still exist? Inasmuch as I prefer not to imagine a world in which you do not exist, I will not will my suicide as long as there is at least an illusion of your existence."

Hence, we are tied to an idea of eternity out of refusal to commit suicide coupled with a belief in non-rational (no criteria) love.

Otherwise, "everything is permitted." ;)



robto -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:10:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

In ancient times, many people saw their rulers or emperors as gods. It's no different today except that the gods of the 21st century are scientists. They are automatically trusted to the degree that many people who call themselves Christians try to change the bible to fit what scientists say instead of the other way around. [sm=eek.gif]

These people who worship scientists as gods never challenge scientists who are fallible human beings. Instead, they defend everything scientists claim no matter how impossible, ridiculous, or how much they contradict the bible and they change God's word instead.


Well I got news for you, Carico, the Bible was written by fallible human beings. And the choice of which books belong in the Bible was made by fallible human beings.

Unless you have received your own personal revelation from God, then everything you have ever read or heard was passed along by fallible human beings. The real question is, how do you decide which fallible human beings to listen to?



drj11 -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:14:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: triode

What about medical science? What about the scientists that improve the way we live? Do you use the end results of their research even though you say they are ruled by Satan? Are questioning my salvation, faith, and saying that I am NOT a Christian?


No doctor has a cure for a terminal illness. So once we humans have all died, then the deeds of medical doctors will be a thing of the past as well. That's why one needs to focus on what lasts for eternity, instead of saving our own skins on this earth. [;)]


Terminal illnesses are called such because they can't be cured. However, if a cure or treatement is developed, the disease is no longer terminal. Medical doctors can cure quite a lot of diseases that were once 'terminal' in days past, and in the future they will be able to cure many diseases which are considered terminal today.



Carico -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:14:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellohellohi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: hellohellohi

If you would like, I would very interestedly follow a thread devoted to the idea that the pronouncements of science are empty. I don't think you are interested in pursuing this from a secular perspective, but such would be interesting. Too "disheartening" as opposed to "heartening?"

It would be nice to use this forum as a platform to speak in a secular mode for a secular audience out of deep Christian belief, however.

If you want to pursue that type of thread, that's up to you. It never hurts to keep repeating that only God's Word is eternal not the words of mere mortal men, because only the truth is eternal...especially when humans are inclined to believe what they can see, not the unseen which is eternal. [sm=icon_smile.gif]



For instance, consider a scenario perhaps far removed from the 21-st century in which humanities gods are not merely the republican pantheon of experts in the domains but each individual, where the population of the earth is also small enough for each individual to do nearly anything they please -- because no firsthand contact with others will take place. (You can ignore this embellishment if you like.) Now, suppose physical doomsday is at hand, because of some cosmic cycle, such as the sun's, and we all know about it. What will we do? There is a book about this, "Possibility of an Island," by Michel Houellebecq that I recommend to anyone interested in bleak futurist scenarios based pretty thoughtfully in the ideas of our age, who don't mind an offensive degree of profanity, unfortunately.

Now, dialectically, I would offer one quasi-secular concept that represents at least an illusion of reaching out to the eternal. Consider this: When someone loves another, it is perhaps fair to say and perhaps universal to define such love as being without criteria. "Why do you love me?" asks the beloved. First of all, the beloved is on dialectically sketch territory, if s/he believes that inquiry expresses the tasks of love. Second of all, the queried ought to answer, "No reason." Any reason supplied will lead closer to the conclusion that the lover, husband, or wife has at base self-interest or expediency rather than, well, love. Further, to express it better:
"Why do you love me?"
"Because I prefer not to imagine a world in which you never existed."
"But what if you never met me?"
"Honestly, that is impossible to say. However, I can say that I might have had hope for you. Since I am speaking from a hypothetical plane, despite of the fact that I do have the knowledge of you, I must say, in all honesty, that I prefer not to imagine this hypothetical world without your existence: I can only imagine an existence which revolved around hope of yours."
"And what if tomorrow I die and you are indeed face with a world without my existence."
"No, not precisely. Your existence will still be a kind of fact. Physical, no. Your memory will fade. I will find someone new, no doubt. Will I see you again? I have no way to say. But will you still exist? Inasmuch as I prefer not to imagine a world in which you do not exist, I will not will my suicide as long as there is at least an illusion of your existence."

Hence, we are tied to an idea of eternity out of refusal to commit suicide coupled with a belief in non-rational (no criteria) love.

Otherwise, "everything is permitted." ;)


Humans with worldly love only know worldly love. So they don't want an existence with out it. God's love, on the other hand, is eternal. So people who know they have God's love and love God themselves, don't cling to people on this earth. That's one reason that Jesus admonished Mary not to cling to him while he was on this earth.



EStan -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:16:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: robto

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

In ancient times, many people saw their rulers or emperors as gods. It's no different today except that the gods of the 21st century are scientists. They are automatically trusted to the degree that many people who call themselves Christians try to change the bible to fit what scientists say instead of the other way around. [sm=eek.gif]

These people who worship scientists as gods never challenge scientists who are fallible human beings. Instead, they defend everything scientists claim no matter how impossible, ridiculous, or how much they contradict the bible and they change God's word instead.


Well I got news for you, Carico, the Bible was written by fallible human beings. And the choice of which books belong in the Bible was made by fallible human beings.

Unless you have received your own personal revelation from God, then everything you have ever read or heard was passed along by fallible human beings. The real question is, how do you decide which fallible human beings to listen to?


You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]



drj11 -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:19:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan
You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]


The Chicago Statement is not inerrant.



cow451 -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:21:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

quote:

Are questioning my salvation, faith, and saying that I am NOT a Christian?


I don't believe Carico was. Besides which, that's a violation of this boards TOS.

No, he was, as do many of the YEC's, posting here.



hellohellohi -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:21:46 PM)

quote:

Humans with worldly love only know worldly love. So they don't want an existence with out it. God's love, on the other hand, is eternal. So people who know they have God's love and love God themselves, don't cling to people on this earth. That's one reason that Jesus admonished Mary not to cling to him while he was on this earth.



Sounds good.

I was just trying to mess with secular concepts though. How can we put eternal hope in a single person or beloved anyways? Such would probably ask too much of the beloved. Perhaps the best way to express true love is to say that one would have that love EVEN if the subject of their love had never existed -- perhaps that would truly fulfill the non-criterion of "no reason." Perhaps now we are secularly approaching a crisis of belief that could lead to God (by God's grace ;).

I don't know what to say, really.



EStan -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:22:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: drj11

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan
You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]


The Chicago Statement is not inerrant.


I believe the Bible is [;)]



Carico -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:23:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

quote:

ORIGINAL: robto

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

In ancient times, many people saw their rulers or emperors as gods. It's no different today except that the gods of the 21st century are scientists. They are automatically trusted to the degree that many people who call themselves Christians try to change the bible to fit what scientists say instead of the other way around. [sm=eek.gif]

These people who worship scientists as gods never challenge scientists who are fallible human beings. Instead, they defend everything scientists claim no matter how impossible, ridiculous, or how much they contradict the bible and they change God's word instead.


Well I got news for you, Carico, the Bible was written by fallible human beings. And the choice of which books belong in the Bible was made by fallible human beings.

Unless you have received your own personal revelation from God, then everything you have ever read or heard was passed along by fallible human beings. The real question is, how do you decide which fallible human beings to listen to?


You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]

If one believes that the bible was written by fallible human beings, then he has no idea where to find God's infallible word and thus cannot know ho God is. [;)]

But those who've been born again of the Holy Spirit know who God is because we have the same Spirit with which the bible was written. So we will always be in agreement with the bible. [;)]But considering that the bible is the only book that describes the life and deeds of Jesus, then one can't know who Jesus is if he believes that the account of his life was written by fallible human beings. That produces shaky faith. [;)]



cow451 -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:25:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]


I have. It's one way to interpret scripture. It's interesting that the Chicago Statement does not endorse YEC, but allows that there are differences among the faithful about the interpretation of Genesis.



Carico -> RE: The gods of the 21st century (8/6/2008 2:27:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cow451

quote:

ORIGINAL: EStan

You should read the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. [;)]


I have. It's one way to interpret scripture. It's interesting that the Chicago Statement does not endorse YEC, but allows that there are differences among the faithful about the interpretation of Genesis.

The people who wrote the Statement of Biblical Inerrancy will eventually die as well. [;)]So if one's faith is in people, whether theologians, kings, or scientists who will die as well, instead of the Living God, then he has nowhere to turn when he dies. [&o]



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI