Page 7 of 34 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111217 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 675
  1. #121  
    Quote Originally Posted by maninrochester View Post
    The Bible/Quran/whatever's purpose is to help mankind understand its place on earth and to guide us through life's trials and tribulations. As a scientific/historical document the Bible leaves something to be desired but as a guide to life it's pretty good.
    I agree with this...the Bible (in my opinion) is not intended as a history book nor a scientific tretease, but rather a collection of stories whose main point is to teach a deeper phylosophical/moral lesson to the reader.

    The Bible and the Qur'an both have some good and morally helpful content. For some people this fulfills the need to find a purpose in life. For others such as myself, the sense of purpose comes from within, we have no need for external believe systems based on a supernatural power.

    In the end I agree that both sides miss the point, is not whose right or whose wrong what matters, is accepting that different people have different needs, some fulfilled by religion, others by science.

    As long as you respect my (dis)believes, I will respect yours.
    Have a great one...Doc D.

    Phillips VELO > Palm III > Palm V > Palm 505m > Treo 180 > Treo 300 > Samsung i500 > Treo 700p > HTC 6800 > Treo 800w > Treo Pro > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  2. #122  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    ...you would not be tempted to believe?Surur
    Tempted yes, but would exhaust all other explanations before succumbing to a magical believe...and I suspect you would to.

    BTW, if angels actually appear and perform miracles, they would themselves become empirical and tangible evidence of the existance of god; he would no longer be an idea or believe but rather a scientific proposition.

    In the end science is just another way of understanding the world, and if our system of belief does not explain the majority of phenomena it should be discarded for a system that works better and explains a larger segment of observed phenomena.
    I certainly agree with this completely
    Last edited by TreoNewt; 04/25/2007 at 10:06 AM.
    Have a great one...Doc D.

    Phillips VELO > Palm III > Palm V > Palm 505m > Treo 180 > Treo 300 > Samsung i500 > Treo 700p > HTC 6800 > Treo 800w > Treo Pro > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  3. #123  
    Quote Originally Posted by captaindan View Post
    I think the bible is an amazing book. What other book can you give that was written by what 15 different people, 4 different languages, over a 200 year span and the book has no contradictions.
    War & Piece has contradictions all through out it. That was written by one person.
    Sorry I am not that great of a speller
    Careful and critical study of the Bible reveals some passages that have discrepancies and even contradictions, this could be the result of Bible stories being an oral tradition for many years before it was finally written and canonized. This could also be result of careless translations through the years as well as multiple authors.

    In the religious context however, it shouldn't detract from the intended message.
    Have a great one...Doc D.

    Phillips VELO > Palm III > Palm V > Palm 505m > Treo 180 > Treo 300 > Samsung i500 > Treo 700p > HTC 6800 > Treo 800w > Treo Pro > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  4.    #124  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Thats what evolution is in a nutshell then. If you believe species can change into other species over time in response to environmental pressures and competition, you believe in evolution. This change is mediated via random DNA mutations and natural selection of advantageous mutations in a population.

    For the horse for example, it was thought changes in the climate caused an increase in grass lands, and led to animals more adapted to plains living (grass diet, running as a form of escape from predators vs hiding) to thrive and leading to the extinction of their ancestors less well adapted to the new circumstances.

    The next step is to see how this could apply to humans. Suppose their was an environmental change e.g. the ozone layer was depleted for the next 100 000 years, leading to an increase in ultraviolet light reaching the ground. The population with darker skin would be at a reproductive advantage, as they would suffer less cancers and would be more successful at having children and raising them. People who have a mutation in their DNA leading to hyper pigmentation would have the same advantage, and would thrive compared to the rest of their unmutated population. Because they have more and healthier offspring the mutation would spread through the population in only a few 1000 years, and life will go on as normal.

    The above is an example of evolution in humans, but not off speciation. That would likely require larger time frames and stronger environmental pressures, plus usually isolation of the reproductive population.

    Surur
    Why can't all of the species of horses lived at the same time, and some died off before we could see them? (By the way, I too love the artists renditions of animals that have never been seen).

    The example you have above is not evolution, it is survival of a species. The humans with darker skins existed at the same time as the humans with fair skins. Unfortunately those with fair skin die off from overexposure to radiation. Hundreds of years down the line, if any of their bones fossilize, scientists could "discover" a species that humans evolved from.

    The coelacanth was thought to be extinct for millions of years, and that modern fish evolved from them, but we now know that coelacanths still exist today!

    A Tyranosaurus's skull was found with blood still on it. If the animal only lived millions of years ago, we would expect all the blood to have been destroyed over time.

    It would be very easy to imagine that the horse, the zebra, and the donkey were all created at the same time along with other animals that were similar and not that they evolved from that other similar animal.

    Commenting on the 5 examples of evolution:

    - The examples only show how one form mutates into a lesser form of the plant/animal. This does not explain how a single celled organism could mutate into a multi-celled organism. The examples show complex going to less complex.

    - There have been human couples that have produced sterile offspring. Does that mean that the two humans are of two different species?
  5.    #125  
    Quote Originally Posted by TreoNewt View Post
    I agree with this...the Bible (in my opinion) is not intended as a history book nor a scientific tretease, but rather a collection of stories whose main point is to teach a deeper phylosophical/moral lesson to the reader.
    Here is a question, then. How do we know Socrates existed? Answer: the writings of Plato and Aristotle. Those are the only writings in which this philosopher is mentioned, yet no one ever questions that he existed.

    Take now the Bible, whose writings pre-date any other historical document we have today. Who has more manuscripts that are closer to the time of events than any other historical document. Are we to dismiss these manuscripts? Are there really discrepancies in the Bible? Can we trust a document that has been handed down generation to generation and copied hundreds of times? The recent discovery of the Qumran texts (Dead Sea Scrolls) shed some light on the biblical documents we have today. When modern manuscripts of Biblical texts are compared with the Qumron scrolls there is nearly 100% agreement between the two. These scrolls date back to 220 BC! Over 2,000 years later we still have the same texts. Amazing, isn't it?

    Note that the texts found were of the Old Testament.
  6.    #126  
    Quote Originally Posted by TreoNewt View Post
    Most atheists wouldn't (myself included), they would try to dismiss the "supernatural" events with science and logic, if unsuccessful, a number of those would simply ignore the events and refuse to believe.
    Exactly what happened to me a page back.
  7. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #127  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    By teenagers, you mean they were each physiologically old enough to procreate, correct?



    Do you believe that God created others, though the Bible does not mention them? If so, based upon what?
    Bueller ...

    Musicman247 ...

    Bueller ...
  8.    #128  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Bueller ...

    Musicman247 ...

    Bueller ...
    My own belief is that Adam was created first. God saw he was lonely, so he made Eve. No other humans were created.

    I know where this is going, so I'll go ahead and explain. I will also say that most of what I am about to say is my own opinion, based only on what I can infer from the scripture.

    Yes, in those days brothers and sisters married. When God created Adam and Eve, they were perfect. Thier DNA was perfect. When they sinned, immediately they begin to degenrate. Their children's DNA was less perfect than their own, but was still perfect enough to not have birth defects as an effect of inbreeding.
  9. #129  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Commenting on the 5 examples of evolution:

    - The examples only show how one form mutates into a lesser form of the plant/animal. This does not explain how a single celled organism could mutate into a multi-celled organism. The examples show complex going to less complex.
    Lesser form? THat is a human construct - there is no "lesser" form, it is simply a different form. And it shows that one species CAN evolve into a new species. That is what I was asked. Read the examples again - they are NOT complex going to less complex.

    As for a single celled organism into a multi-celled, that is not as well know at this point. We do see current example (mitochondria, for example) where it appears that an ancestral single celled organisms potentially ingested and formed a symbiotic relationship with another single celled organism. We also see examples where multiple single celled organisms live in a "group" structure, in some cases with each individual cell taking on different roles. It isn't a large stretch to see how that type of system could evolve into a rudimentary multi-celled organism.

    - There have been human couples that have produced sterile offspring. Does that mean that the two humans are of two different species?

    No.

    Chris
  10. #130  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Exactly what happened to me a page back.
    Except that your "evidence" was anecdotal. There is no way to prove that there wasn't a mistake made in the original xray, or anything like that. It could not be reproduced, replicated, in any way.

    Chris
  11. #131  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Why can't all of the species of horses lived at the same time, and some died off before we could see them? (By the way, I too love the artists renditions of animals that have never been seen).
    Because the timeline of the fossils shows clear changes over time - the modern horse was NOT seen back then, so it isn't a case where they all were there initially, and some of them died off.

    The coelacanth was thought to be extinct for millions of years, and that modern fish evolved from them, but we now know that coelacanths still exist today!
    Perhaps you can tell me why this is a common argument use against evolution. The fact that we thought a species of fish was dead, and it wasn't doesn't seem to say anything about evolution one way or another, IMO.

    A Tyranosaurus's skull was found with blood still on it. If the animal only lived millions of years ago, we would expect all the blood to have been destroyed over time.
    I seem to recall reading something about this, but if I recall, the situation was relatively unique in the way the fossil and skull were preserved.

    It wasn't like they found red dripping blood on the skull or something.

    It would be very easy to imagine that the horse, the zebra, and the donkey were all created at the same time along with other animals that were similar and not that they evolved from that other similar animal.
    Not if fossil evidence indicates that some species weren't around "back then".


    Chris
  12. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #132  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    My own belief is that Adam was created first. God saw he was lonely, so he made Eve. No other humans were created.

    I know where this is going, so I'll go ahead and explain. I will also say that most of what I am about to say is my own opinion, based only on what I can infer from the scripture.

    Yes, in those days brothers and sisters married. When God created Adam and Eve, they were perfect. Thier DNA was perfect. When they sinned, immediately they begin to degenrate. Their children's DNA was less perfect than their own, but was still perfect enough to not have birth defects as an effect of inbreeding.
    Shopharim - Your thoughts on this?
  13. #133  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Here is a question, then. How do we know Socrates existed? Answer: the writings of Plato and Aristotle. Those are the only writings in which this philosopher is mentioned, yet no one ever questions that he existed.

    Take now the Bible, whose writings pre-date any other historical document we have today. Who has more manuscripts that are closer to the time of events than any other historical document. Are we to dismiss these manuscripts? Are there really discrepancies in the Bible? Can we trust a document that has been handed down generation to generation and copied hundreds of times? The recent discovery of the Qumran texts (Dead Sea Scrolls) shed some light on the biblical documents we have today. When modern manuscripts of Biblical texts are compared with the Qumron scrolls there is nearly 100% agreement between the two. These scrolls date back to 220 BC! Over 2,000 years later we still have the same texts. Amazing, isn't it?

    Note that the texts found were of the Old Testament.
    Is it truly amazing? 220BC is not that long ago in relativistic terms. Besides who should trust a book that was written 10,000+ years after the event purportedly took place. And if one assumes the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, 2500 years back is only 5.5*10^-5 % ago...practically yesterday. Well if I didnt screw up on my hastily constructed math.

    Oh and once again..the discrepancies are here.

    Please refute these for me
  14.    #134  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    Except that your "evidence" was anecdotal. There is no way to prove that there wasn't a mistake made in the original xray, or anything like that. It could not be reproduced, replicated, in any way.

    Chris
    So the "Big Bang" can be reproduced and/or replicated?
    Single celled organisms evolving into multi-celled organisms can be reproduced and/or replicated?
    A monkey turning into a human can be reproduced and/or replicated?

    Of course, even if these could be reproduced and/or replicated by man, it would prove that an outside intelligence is needed to produce these kinds of changes.
  15.    #135  
    Quote Originally Posted by volwrath View Post
    Is it truly amazing? 220BC is not that long ago in relativistic terms. Besides who should trust a book that was written 10,000+ years after the event purportedly took place. And if one assumes the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, 2500 years back is only 5.5*10^-5 % ago...practically yesterday. Well if I didnt screw up on my hastily constructed math.

    Oh and once again..the discrepancies are here.

    Please refute these for me
    It is amazing when you compare these manuscripts against other manuscripts we have, and not the "age of the world".

    Also, you seem to think that the Bible was written as one book very recently. That is not the case. The Bible is a collection of historical documents written down by people who lived in the time about which they were writing.
  16. #136  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    So the "Big Bang" can be reproduced and/or replicated?
    Single celled organisms evolving into multi-celled organisms can be reproduced and/or replicated?
    A monkey turning into a human can be reproduced and/or replicated?

    Of course, even if these could be reproduced and/or replicated by man, it would prove that an outside intelligence is needed to produce these kinds of changes.
    No, but the underlying principles can be.

    Surur
  17. #137  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Also, you seem to think that the Bible was written as one book very recently. That is not the case. The Bible is a collection of historical documents written down by people who lived in the time about which they were writing.
    The earliest written account of Genesis is generally accepted to be 1000BC. If one accepts that, it is 10,000+ years after the events of Genesis took place. And thats if you have a young earth belief. Hence my statement holds.
  18. #138  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Exactly what happened to me a page back.
    True, but it goes both ways...
    Have a great one...Doc D.

    Phillips VELO > Palm III > Palm V > Palm 505m > Treo 180 > Treo 300 > Samsung i500 > Treo 700p > HTC 6800 > Treo 800w > Treo Pro > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  19. #139  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Here is a question, then. How do we know Socrates existed? Answer: the writings of Plato and Aristotle. Those are the only writings in which this philosopher is mentioned, yet no one ever questions that he existed.
    You also forgot the Dialoges of Xenophon, the Plays of Aristophanes and letters from Timon of Philius.

    Is very possible that the life of Socrates as we know it today is a mixture of truth and legend as colored by the people who chonicled his life; the same can be argued about any ancient text including the Bible.

    The fundamental difference is that these writings are not taken as sacred or infallible, and Socrates is not considered an all powerful god.
    Have a great one...Doc D.

    Phillips VELO > Palm III > Palm V > Palm 505m > Treo 180 > Treo 300 > Samsung i500 > Treo 700p > HTC 6800 > Treo 800w > Treo Pro > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  20. #140  
    Quote Originally Posted by TreoNewt View Post
    Careful and critical study of the Bible reveals some passages that have discrepancies and even contradictions, this could be the result of Bible stories being an oral tradition for many years before it was finally written and canonized. This could also be result of careless translations through the years as well as multiple authors.

    In the religious context however, it shouldn't detract from the intended message.
    I by no means am an expert on anything, except my boats and some fishing, but I do read the bible and I do go to bible studys and I would love to know what these discrepancies are. I am not trying to be a smarty or anything I would just like to know what you think. I for one think it is kind of amazing, what are there 12 chapters in the new testiment and they all tell the same story. All written by different people. Some in different languages.
    I do apoligize for my spelling.
Page 7 of 34 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111217 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions