what if God could be proven?
- Thread starter NMSquirrel
- Start date
LColburn86
Registered Member
God did create us for His ego if you want to be technical, but I would hardly say its a bad thing as He is God. And having a nature such as that you would need something to worship you.
If I get married and my husband never tells me he loves me... I would stop loving Him.
Nothing is as cut and dry as that. It would take a lot, but that would certainly help make matters worse.
If God is as powerful as the Bible portrays then He would need something to Love and Love Him, as He is as Holy, and Loving as He is Just. So He must create something to Love.
Don't ask me why it was us. I haven't the slightest idea. I wouldn't make us.
I would have stuck with Angels, thou that didn't go over so well either. lol
also,
There is no observation in the Bible that marks the time difference between when the earth was created and when we were created by God. Greenboy. The only thing you could possibly debate with each other effectively about is plants. They have an answer for everything. This is SCIFORUM. ^_^
The question was
If I get married and my husband never tells me he loves me... I would stop loving Him.
Nothing is as cut and dry as that. It would take a lot, but that would certainly help make matters worse.
If God is as powerful as the Bible portrays then He would need something to Love and Love Him, as He is as Holy, and Loving as He is Just. So He must create something to Love.
Don't ask me why it was us. I haven't the slightest idea. I wouldn't make us.
I would have stuck with Angels, thou that didn't go over so well either. lol
also,
There is no observation in the Bible that marks the time difference between when the earth was created and when we were created by God. Greenboy. The only thing you could possibly debate with each other effectively about is plants. They have an answer for everything. This is SCIFORUM. ^_^
The question was
LColburn86
Registered Member
We are unwanted here. lol We're just interesting so they keep us around. Haha
"Looks like this"?
The "description" is so vague it could be an elephant walking backwards.
Dinosaurs in the bible... try FACTS instead of supposition.
Last edited:
"Looks like this"?
The "description is so vague it could be an elephant walking backwards.
Dinosaurs in the bible... try FACTS instead of supposition.
i have heard that story dyw...although i would sooner believe that dinosaurs existed before humans, and not at the same time..
the story that the bible relates does present some sort of creature not catalogued by scientists..being vague does not discount it as a dino..but being vague it does open it up to arguement..
Not catalogued?
Hmm, five minutes on the net will give reasoned explanations of why it could be an elephant, or a hippo, all from serious scholars.
i say not catalogued cause then the bible would say whether it was an elephant or a hippo as i seriously doubt they(the authors of the bible) would not know what a hippo or an elephant is..
as far as serious scholars..there are serious scholars on the side of the bible..
Yes. And some of those say hippo or elephant.
It's only the (lunatic) fringe that claim dinosaur.
Yes. And some of those say hippo or elephant.
It's only the (lunatic) fringe that claim dinosaur.
i would say it was a minority..but i wouldn't claim lunatic...
well well
I like to expose different points of view, I do not insult or use derogatory words. When I was younger I work for a while in a zoo, I never saw an elephant moving backwards, the animals only move where they can see first. Also you guys are evaluating the today's world like we know it, but in biblical times and before, the world was very different, camel and elephants roamed with the bison or the American Buffalo, in country like Italy and middle Eastern Countries Lions were common sight, Was when the human civilization start getting more complex such animals were extinct, with them the dinos. The word dinosaurs is a modern word, but the animal existed with humans. The Chinese culture and you probably saw that, they have the dragons all over the place, painted, embroidered in their clothes, in Internet images, and in their res truants all over the world, other cultures also claim and Use similar animals, I am sure you saw the temples of the Maya culture, they claimed a "feathered flying snake" known by them as kukulkan, a god for this people,is chiseled in all their temples and looks like a dino.
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks-cambodia.htm in this site you are going to see a Stegosaurus once again Chiseled in one of their temple, the picture is very clear. So why then when something like that is described in the bible is doubted? because if we accept the concept then the bible is true and if the bible is true God is true, and that will prove the veracity of the book. And the existence of God
I like to expose different points of view, I do not insult or use derogatory words. When I was younger I work for a while in a zoo, I never saw an elephant moving backwards, the animals only move where they can see first. Also you guys are evaluating the today's world like we know it, but in biblical times and before, the world was very different, camel and elephants roamed with the bison or the American Buffalo, in country like Italy and middle Eastern Countries Lions were common sight, Was when the human civilization start getting more complex such animals were extinct, with them the dinos. The word dinosaurs is a modern word, but the animal existed with humans. The Chinese culture and you probably saw that, they have the dragons all over the place, painted, embroidered in their clothes, in Internet images, and in their res truants all over the world, other cultures also claim and Use similar animals, I am sure you saw the temples of the Maya culture, they claimed a "feathered flying snake" known by them as kukulkan, a god for this people,is chiseled in all their temples and looks like a dino.
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks-cambodia.htm in this site you are going to see a Stegosaurus once again Chiseled in one of their temple, the picture is very clear. So why then when something like that is described in the bible is doubted? because if we accept the concept then the bible is true and if the bible is true God is true, and that will prove the veracity of the book. And the existence of God
Nope.
Dinosaurs were extinct before humans appeared.
Yes, unfortunately they aren't "dragons", that's what we in the West call them. They're spirit creatures and were never claimed to be actual animals.
Not really. It's claimed to be a stegosaurus. Doesn't quite match.
Maybe you also accept (on the "evidence" of those carvings) that the god Indra was also around at the time...:shrug:
Why should I accept the bible is true?
It claims that bats are birds. (Among numerous other errors of fact).
Accepting something as true doesn't prove it's true.
Maybe you should learn a bit more about what constitutes proof.
Edit: yes there are also numerous true/ factual things in the bible. But their existence doesn't mean that the entire thing is factual.
Last edited:
Dinos Are alive today
IF you look to the description of a dino, well these fellas are pretty close, I do believe they are surviving Dinos, they are know for some time now, if you ask me, we do not talk about them often and probably there is poor entries of them in our literature, but they exist and they are doing very well, thanks. And you can see them in any zooin our country. they can kill you and eat you, they hunt and eat animals as big as a goat or a cattle. Watch the video and enjoy. If the video do not work, sometimes this happens in the forum, just copy and paste in Youtube. and watch them.
ww.youtube.com/watch?v=QOF4YPdYELg
well human vocabulary for those of you "splitting hair"with the bible changes from one generation to another, a bat is bird, well is pretty close, if you ask me remember what they say "if it looks like a duck and walk like a duck" the bible is 2000 years old! in our generation words change meaning all the time, in the 1950's if you were gay you were happy, in 2,009 if you are gay you are involve romantically with a person of your own sex. That's is just an example. We a millions of new word hitting the English language every day. testing, tweeting , vooks etc. The bible happened before we have a Mendel discovering the genetics of living animals and plants, before we had a a Linnaeus classifying animals and plants for us, before Plato, Cicero etc. All these people shaped the scientific world and they way we think, all these people educated us enough for us to know a bat is a flying mammal,not a bird. But if we try to look at the human world 2000 years ago, a bat looks and behave in many ways like a bird, some people in the third world thinks is a bird, like some people in New York ,think the Killer whale are whales, when we know Killer whales are Dolphins, they even mate successfully one with the other. So I think this was not a mistake is a vocabulary limitation, like a guy in the year 3,000 will read this posted message and will think " there is another proved fact humans and and vats were living together as resent as 2009, how about that ?(bats are dying out you know?).
IF you look to the description of a dino, well these fellas are pretty close, I do believe they are surviving Dinos, they are know for some time now, if you ask me, we do not talk about them often and probably there is poor entries of them in our literature, but they exist and they are doing very well, thanks. And you can see them in any zooin our country. they can kill you and eat you, they hunt and eat animals as big as a goat or a cattle. Watch the video and enjoy. If the video do not work, sometimes this happens in the forum, just copy and paste in Youtube. and watch them.
ww.youtube.com/watch?v=QOF4YPdYELg
well human vocabulary for those of you "splitting hair"with the bible changes from one generation to another, a bat is bird, well is pretty close, if you ask me remember what they say "if it looks like a duck and walk like a duck" the bible is 2000 years old! in our generation words change meaning all the time, in the 1950's if you were gay you were happy, in 2,009 if you are gay you are involve romantically with a person of your own sex. That's is just an example. We a millions of new word hitting the English language every day. testing, tweeting , vooks etc. The bible happened before we have a Mendel discovering the genetics of living animals and plants, before we had a a Linnaeus classifying animals and plants for us, before Plato, Cicero etc. All these people shaped the scientific world and they way we think, all these people educated us enough for us to know a bat is a flying mammal,not a bird. But if we try to look at the human world 2000 years ago, a bat looks and behave in many ways like a bird, some people in the third world thinks is a bird, like some people in New York ,think the Killer whale are whales, when we know Killer whales are Dolphins, they even mate successfully one with the other. So I think this was not a mistake is a vocabulary limitation, like a guy in the year 3,000 will read this posted message and will think " there is another proved fact humans and and vats were living together as resent as 2009, how about that ?(bats are dying out you know?).
Last edited:
Are they stegasauri?
Nope. So what's your point?
In other words you haven't got an actual "defence" so you have to resort to complaining about hair "splinting" (the word is splitting, but never mind).
Not even close to supporting your point. Bats don't have feathers (there's one clue).
So, do you have any facts to support you belief?
I note that you ignored the question about the existence of Indra.
Oh no I understood your point. But it was entirely irrelevant.
The meaning of the word bird has nothing to do with it.
Simple observation would have shown that bats don't have, for example, feathers or beaks, or lay eggs.
It's one more example of religion setting itself up as the ultimate arbiter of knowledge, only to to fall flat on its face when confronted with reality (and people prepared to to say "Hang on a minute, that doesn't sound right").
too bad we can't go back in time and tell the authors of the bible that..
this also applies to other orginazations..like government, don't they set themselves up as the ultimate arbiter of knowledge?
and also your statement reflects an inacuracy with your words..
i mean.. you are generalizing..how is religion setting itself up?
isn't that more of a statement of your opinion?
and alot of ppl i know that are involved with religion are the first to say"Hang on a minute, that doesn't sound right"
now we are getting off topic..
Greenboy:
if god were to physically manifest himself before you and tell you to do something totally irrational would you do it?
(dont think he would tell you to kill someone..)
be honest,this is not a test,there is no right answer,please use a number two pencil...oops..sorry..
Examples?
Government tells you how they want it to be. And goes up for re-election (in democracies at least) on the understanding that they maybe don't have all the answers. Governments don't dictate absolutes, which religion does/ did.
Religion claimed (or claimed in ages past) to have all the answers and persecuted anyone who disagreed, or even questioned.
Nope.
Nowadays yes, since religion is losing its grip on society.
See how far you get questioning the tenets and underlying beliefs behind religion in, say, a fundamentalist church.
And I think you'll find the ones inside religion that come up with "that doesn't sound right" aren't actually querying the "principles" behind the beliefs, simply the application/ interpretation.
how many laws have they passed without our consent..
so you are argueing what was..not what is..
isn't there a thread about that?something about primitive thinking?
do the research..find out how many americans attend church..then find out how many americans who don't attend church believe in god..i think you will find that your statement is inaccurate
i question everything..to that end i tend to piss off most pastors cause it gets to the point where they have to say 'i don't know' and they don't like to say that..
i do tend to agree to a point with that statement,but the subject is religion and not god..
actually i think we are confusing 'do as your told' with 'think for yourself'
the 'think for yourself' type ppl are the ones who question..
the 'do as you told' are the ones who you are reffering to..
So? Elect better representatives.
Not quite, it's just more obvious in the past.
Not quite: I meant overall (worldwide) - it's not a prelude to being burnt at the stake these days to "come out" as an atheist.
Doesn't this statement of yours counter your point above?
Um, isn't religion built around god?
Religion is a "do as you are told" ultimately.
that wouldn't help..also just for the record..(in case you couln't tell)
i have NO confidence in the way government is run nowadays,they keep telling me its for my own good...i do not believe them..
huh? quote both..Doesn't this statement of yours counter your point above?
religion is still man made and as such is susceptible to its own humanity..
you don't have to believe in religion to believe in god..
for the most part i would agree with that statement.cause in my search for the 'think for yourself' type churches they are few and far between..