so i've been reading on this new earth theroy the chrisstians have stuck up our asses... Wheres the evidence for it?

Where's the evidence for it. And while your at it, why don't we go through some other questiens...

-How do you prove the authinticity of the Bible? It was written by mere mortals, no more human than the man/woman who wrote my science textbook.

-and how do you prove its authenticity. Humans aren't perfect, we make mistakes, like religion...

-How do you know this whole religion this isn't a joke, started by some guy whose been dead 2100 years, and your all just suckers

-How is the most humble christian more fit for office than the best educated pagan (james d kennedy, leader of dominationists)

-What makes you think an american christian state would work? Europe was divided into many similar camps for 700 years and nothing happened. Human progress halted. It even got a flashy name, the dark ages?

-How can god create a rock he can't lift?

-How is it right to persecute homosexuals, buddhists, muslems, and athists. Were people too, and many of those "horrible" homos are actually very well educated.

(not being insulting, I have many gay freinds)

-Why are all you christians conservitive, when Jesus (as you tell it) was obviously a libral. And so is god, if he loves us all so much (gays and athiests alike http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif) why do you

dislike so many people.

-What is the justifcation of creationism in our schools. It isn't even a scientific theroy. Its just a fantisy-sci fi story.

And why do we want to learn that.

-Where is the basis for creation without evidence.

-Why do you belive that there was no big bang and say there is no evidence. THere is plenty of evidence, including the background radiation that surrounds us all. Not from stars, it is shifting through the EM spectrum gradually from high energy waves to low energy waves. As of now, I belive it is currently microwaves.

-What game is he playin? He wanted the Palistinians or whoever it was away from egypt, yet every time the Pharo wanted to let them go god hardind his heart. He flip-flops more than any polotician.

-Why are you a christian if jesus is a jew? Isn't his religion good enough for you. And what about the chance he was some crazy cook? My vegas oddsmaker gives me a 1 in 156,494 chance he really was god and not crazy.

http://www.jesusreligion.com/ideas_of_god.html

"The mind is fully capable of holding two contradictory ideas at once. Religious fundamentalists do it all the time."

John 18:38, "What is truth?"

One thing that I've learned about debates is that you shouldn't ask questions. It's too weak to get your point across. Also, use correct spelling and grammar if you want people to respect your opinion.

And lastly, don't clump a bunch of unrelated arguments into one post. It never turns out good. By "unrelated" I mean stuff like creationism vs. God lifting the rock paradox. Just... don't.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but you can't ask the illogical to be logical. And there's no rule anywhere that says that everything in the world has to be logical.

A lot of things don't make sense.

Cheers,

Lost

quote:Originally posted by Clarphimous:

And lastly, don't clump a bunch of unrelated arguments into one post. It never turns out good. By "unrelated" I mean stuff like creationism vs. God lifting the rock paradox. Just... don't.

i agree. Too many topics in one post. Look at how messy it gets with basically singular

topics...

The Right To Life Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Euthanasia: The Devil's Agenda for America Pages: 1 2

PROVE to Me God Actually Exists Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

To stealthweasle666_no_god,

many of your questions have been argued over and over.. check topic history, some may have the answers that you are looking for (either pro or con), otherwise save your questions somewhere, and make separate topics.... the one thing the members of this forum have in common, everyone has an "opinion" they are willing to "share". And every once in awhile, something even makes some sense, from the opposing side.

I' a Roman Catholic and I read that entire thing you typed and 100 percent of it is wrong. Read up on every one of those criticisms in the Catholic Catechism and you will find out that all your assumptions are just stupid misleadings. Before you critcize someone or something, at least be educated in what you are talking about.

quote:Originally posted by STL Blunt:

I' a Roman Catholic and I read that entire thing you typed and 100 percent of it is wrong. Read up on every one of those criticisms in the Catholic Cate

chism and you will find out that all your assumptions are just stupid misleadings. Before you critcize someone or something, at least be educated in what you are talking about.

Really? Then please show me how you know the bible is the word of god; without a shadow of a doubt.

He may have presented the argument in a totally incoherent manner, but that does not mean that the underlying points of all his arguments are wrong.

If you claim they are wrong, then please back that up. You can start by backing up the above; that is, how do you know, without a shadow of a doubt, that the bible is the inspired word of god?

[This message has been edited by Rust (edited 05-19-2005).]

There is no evidence for a "new earth". Science and scripture are not contradictory. The Gap Theory, which postulates a gap between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2, leaves the door open for billions of years of God's work: the creation of the universe, Satan's rebellion and the restoration of the earth, which could have taken six days. Different Hebrew words are used for creation and the restoration of the earth. It gets a bit technical but it does make sense, scientifically and spiritually.

If you use the gap theory, then you DO run contrary to scripture, since you then must argue that sin, existed before Adam and Eve, which is contrary to the bible.

Sin and evil did exist before Adam, with the fall of Satan. Adam was made perfect, as Satan was created perfect until the day iniquity was found in him (Isaiah something or other, I believe). In the restoration of the earth, God calls everything good, except for the firmament dividing the waters from the waters. Why? Because the demons were then in the seas and in the air. These demons were once people who lived upon the earth during the reign of Satan. I suspect, unlike Adam, they partook of the Tree of Life and were rendered immortal yet sinful and could therefore have no redemption. Hence the judgement upon the earth, rendering it a formless waste (Gen 1.2), not the perfect creation of Gen 1.1.

"I' a Roman Catholic and I read that entire thing you typed and 100 percent of it is wrong. Read up on every one of those criticisms in the Catholic Catechism and you will find out that all your assumptions are just stupid misleadings. Before you critcize someone or something, at least be educated in what you are talking about."

-the one catholic dude above

first off, I agree most had been covered. But then I got a little carried away in my writing cuz i was in a bad mood...

But any way sainty...

I do have a clue about what I'm talking about. I've read the bible through 3 times and whenever I need a good laugh I'll go to the occasional church service (to you others like me easters the funniest. Life after death? thats like not gaining weight after a diet)

Now to undermine your belifes I have something to say.

There is no purgatory.

It was just something made up by the catholic church in the middle ages to increase membership since fewer people were joining. It was supposed to give hope for them... A few hundred milliion years in purgatory vs a few hundred in hell. Somethin or nothin. But since you catholics are still around obviously this simple lie worked. Purgatory isn't even in the bible.

My little brother learned this in 7th grade.

... So go think about this and whatever else might be false and come back in a little while...

quote:Purgatory isn't even in the bible.

watched TV recently?

or just go outside your front door...

quote:Originally posted by Pow r T och:

Sin and evil did exist before Adam, with the fall of Satan. Adam was made perfect, as Satan was created perfect until the day iniquity was found in him (Isaiah something or other, I believe). In the restoration of the earth, God calls everything good, except for the firmament dividing the waters from the waters. Why? Because the demons were then in the seas and in the air. These demons were once people who lived upon the earth during the reign of Satan. I suspect, unlike Adam, they partook of the Tree of Life and were rendered immortal yet sinful and could therefore have no redemption. Hence the judgement upon the earth, rendering it a formless waste (Gen 1.2), not the perfect creation of Gen 1.1.



Incorrect, the bible states that suffering and death was caused by the introduccion of ORIGINAL sin (Corinthians 15:21 and Romans 5:12 among others). It's called ORIGINAL sin for a reason, that reason being that there was no sin before them.

Thus, once again, the gap theory fails.

Sorry, I didn't notice this was a Catholic discussion. Pardon.

quote:Originally posted by LostCause:

I'm not saying you're wrong...

...A lot of things don't make sense.

Cheers,

Lost

Like this thread and why it hasn't been closed/deleted.

O, and I have no problem saying it, he/she/it is WRONG!!

-[i]Totse has gone to hell......[/b] http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Pow r T och:

The Gap Theory, which postulates a gap between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2, leaves the door open for billions of years of God's work: the creation of the universe, Satan's rebellion and the restoration of the earth, which could have taken six days. Different Hebrew words are used for creation and the restoration of the earth. It gets a bit technical but it does make sense, scientifically and spiritually.

Here is further arguement against the Gap Theory:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i3/chronogenealogies.asp

Anyone who has tried to read all the 'begats' in Genesis should give alot of credit to the theologens that researched and made this understandable.

Also, i would like to add, somewhere in my reading (i can not remember if it was secular or not, nor did i try to verify the claim) that there have been no new domestications of animals since about 4500 years ago.

So, compare that to the literal Biblical reading of years since the time of the flood (i.e. flood about 2500 bc {according to the conclusion of the link} plus about 2000 years since Jesus' birth) comes up to rufffly 4500 yrs.

I think that is intruiging to say the least.

I'm going to let someone here google the domestication 'age'. Either take my word or check it out for yourselves... and if i'm mistaken, let me know.

But, seriously, does anybody really believe the earth is only six thousand years old and science so completely wrong? I'm not saying the Gap Theory is perfect. They are, after all, only theories; and highly speculative.

But the argument for a young earth seems, to me, to re-write reality. And I wouldn't say that's impossible, either. Who knows? Only God and the angels, whoever was there, I suppose.

Jesus was an Alien.

xtreem5150ahm: Here is further arguement against the Gap Theory: http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i3/chronogenealogies.asp

Anyone who has tried to read all the 'begats' in Genesis should give alot of credit to the theologens that researched and made this understandable.

The gap wasn't supposed to be between geneologies, or Adam and Eve living for millions of years (as I've heard stated before). The gap is supposed to be between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

***GAP***

1:2 Now the earth was without shape and empty, and darkness was over the surface of the watery deep, but the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the water.

Not that I believe in the theory, nor do I believe it was the original meaning of the text. Just that the website doesn't deal with the gap theory and the pre-adamite world. My grandparents use Dake's Annotated Bible, which follows gap theory, so I know what it's about. Sorta.

quote:Originally posted by Pow r T och:

But, seriously, does anybody really believe the earth is only six thousand years old and science so completely wrong? I'm not saying the Gap Theory is perfect. They are, after all, only theories; and highly speculative.

But the argument for a young earth seems, to me, to re-write reality. And I wouldn't say that's impossible, either. Who knows? Only God and the angels, whoever was there, I suppose.



I, for one, believe that the earth is about 6000 yo. And so do many people. From all walks of life.

I dont think science itself is wrong. I think that point of reference is different. That is to say, i believe the Bible is the truth and if about 6000 years is correct but science says 14.5 billion years, then the scientists may need to re-examine their findings.

i think this will explain what i mean (this is from TJ, a creation science magazine published by AiG):

quote:What is Answers in Genesis?

Answers in Genesis ministry is an independant, non-profit, non-denominational organization, controlled by Christians in the fields of science and education, committed to researching, developing, and promoting Christian creationist materials, and Christian school texts and aids.

Our work is based on acceptance of:

1. The Bible is the written word of God. It is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout.

2. The final guide to the interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself.

3. The account of origins presented in Genesis is a simple but factual presentation of actual events and therefore provides a reliable framework (emphasis mine) for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life, mankind, the earth and the universe.

4. Scripture teaches a recent origin for man and the whole creation.

5. The great Flood of Genesis was an actual historic event, worldwide (global) in its extent and effect.

6. The special creation of Adam (as one man) and Eve (as one woman) and thier subsequent fall into sin, is the basis for the necessity of salvation for mankind (and thus for the Gospel of Jesus Christ).

7. The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclaimation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer and Judge.

Please note that in all of this, we openly proclaim that our work is centred around Jesus Christ. We are convinced that the real needs of men and women can only be met by reconciliation to God through faith in and commitment to Jesus Christ the Creator, as Lord and Saviour.

I've felt in agreement to that, long before i had ever heard of creation science or AiG. I felt this way from reading and studying God's Word. And i was very greatful to find others that believe along the same lines as me. Even many of the people in the church i grew up in, have "compromised" to (i suppose) make some sense of the differences between the Bible and science (and this included my parents to some degree, and myself too...cuz i used to think, "maybe God put the fossils there to test us, or the devil, to decieve us", but i dont think this is necessarily the case anymore, but maybe possible).



Edit: Changed 14.5 billion years from 4.5 billion years... which i suppose it is 15 - 18 billion years... the time flies faster than the McDonalds signs. Which i remember them changing...do they still do that, or do they just say "millions and millions sold" ?

[This message has been edited by xtreem5150ahm (edited 05-25-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Clarphimous:

The gap wasn't supposed to be between geneologies, or Adam and Eve living for millions of years (as I've heard stated before). The gap is supposed to be between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

***GAP***

1:2 Now the earth was without shape and empty, and darkness was over the surface of the watery deep, but the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the water.

Not that I believe in the theory, nor do I believe it was the original meaning of the text. Just that the website doesn't deal with the gap theory and the pre-adamite world. My grandparents use Dake's Annotated Bible, which follows gap theory, so I know what it's about. Sorta.

Ya, i realize that there are other places that people have tried to put the gaps.

The problem i have with a gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 is the theory would need yet another gap to accommodate what science says about the amount of time from the origin of life forms until man (which, according to Genesis, is days 3-6, which 1:1 and 1:2 are still during the first day).

Many people have suggested that the creation days are really 'ages', and they quote the Bible (i'm going to paraphrase instead of looking it up) where it says, "a day to the Lord is as a 1000 days and a 1000 days is as a day..", which means we would have to study the Hebrew to determine the meaning and the context of the word 'day'. People have done just that, and if you want, i can give reference to it, but for right now, i'm gonna just gonna say that i dont think it holds water and try to briefly explain a couple of the points against day = age. The word 'day' in Genesis uses ordinals with it i.e. day one, day two, etc. Also, it is combined with "evening and morning".

I think it was Gerald Schroeder in "The Science of God" who gave the best arguement for day/age theory. What he pointed out was day one = 14.5 billion years, half that (7.75 billion years) and you get day two, half that (3.875 Billion yrs)day 3... etc. (i'm going by memory) and at each of the 'days' roughly match what science says happened. He "proved' his theory by thinking in terms of relativity. Which, if his theory is right, it answers one of the two arguements that i think are tuff. That one in particluar is the distance of the stars vs. the speed of light inside of 6000 years.

But the bigger problem that his theory poses, is, billions of years of death and destruction prior to Original Sin; which ends up going against Scripture (with Adam, sin entered the world, and with sin, death).

I hope i was complete enough, i had to deal with the dogs and lost my train of thought.. which can be a good thing -- keeps me shorter of wind.

Modern christianity went through a series of censorship and editting by the orthodox church to make it appeal to the general public.

quote:Originally posted by beezarro:

Modern christianity went through a series of censorship and editting by the orthodox church to make it appeal to the general public.

Can you show some sources?

Because, from what i understand, we can look at the earliest manuscripts (the few autographs we have found, are very small fragments, so we can only look at the copies), and find that there pretty much the way it is presented in the translations (barring 'language barriers', euphamisms, and current word meanings vs. meanings of the words when translated).

And to Jackketch, please, hold off on comments... http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm

The site is about Montanism, but gives a chronological history of the christian church.

---

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

A site talking about ancient books recovered despite the church's effort to erradicate them.

---

http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scrolls.exhibit/intro.html

Ancient manuscripts predating most christian gospel writings. Hopefully you've heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls, they're pretty popular. I haven't had time to read through them all, but you'll find it interesting.

[This message has been edited by beezarro (edited 05-25-2005).]

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen08.html

Very good compilation of certain historical events in christian culture. You might want to check his sources though.

--- http://www.essene.com/EarlyChurch/OrthodoxFromGnostic/pagels.html

Very good site, explains the diversity of early christianity vs. the political power of the orthodox.

[This message has been edited by beezarro (edited 05-25-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by beezarro:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm

The site is about Montanism, but gives a chronological history of the christian church.

---

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

A site talking about ancient books recovered despite the church's effort to erradicate them.

---

http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scrolls.exhibit/intro.html

Ancient manuscripts predating most christian gospel writings. Hopefully you've heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls, they're pretty popular. I haven't had time to read through them all, but you'll find it interesting.



I was just quickly scanning over those sites (i'll read them closer, later) and noticed that as far as the Dead Sea scrolls, none include NT writing (which i was pretty sure of, but not positive). Which is one reason i generally the main reason i dismiss these claims of the early church supressing 'scripture'.

The early (Christian) church basically took the Hebrew Books as Canon.



One of the things that discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls did was agree with the O.T. text that we have, even though it pre-dated the manuscripts that we had, prior to the 1940's and 50's, by a few hundred years.

This is from:

http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html

20. The Scrolls have revolutionized textual criticism of the Old Testament. Interestingly, now with manuscripts predating the medieval period, we find these texts in substantial agreement with the Masoretic text as well as widely variant forms.

I'm not too familiar with the other stuff that you link-keyed, so i'll have to read up on it... since that seems to be more along the lines of your statement about the church.

mahalo http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

I was just quickly scanning over those sites (i'll read them closer, later) and noticed that as far as the Dead Sea scrolls, none include NT writing (which i was pretty sure of, but not positive). Which is one reason i generally the main reason i dismiss these claims of the early church supressing 'scripture'.

Of course it's not going to be "New Testament" material; it was never put into the canon by the Catholic/Orthodox Church. There were other Christian churches at that time, you know?

Here are some links i emailed to my freind

-http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17852

-http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=37&t=000537&p=

-http://www.religioustolerance.org/reconstr.htm

-www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/ DirectoryRiseOfDominionismInAmerica.html

-www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/ ConstitutionRestorationAct.htm

-shakespearessister.blogspot.com/ 2005/04/friday-limerick-saturday-edition.html

-www.answers.com/topic/dominionism

Heres the big article i read. Very good.

-http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/7235393?pageid=rs.Home&pageregion=single7&rnd=1112887778015&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.1040

and another blood thirsty site.

-http://www.web-ministry.com/linearpost.php?postID=8632

My responses to it are open your eyes and open your eyes email address (don't bother emailin it, its for schmucks on that site)