|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 Add your comment | | | | From: |
br | 2003-05-29 14:35:13 | | Subject: | hey | | Comment: | So what is the Evolution side say? An interesting theory asserting that imperfections in DNA causing mutations resulting in changing a kind/ specie into something other that the original blue prints of their DNA. A certain flaw begins to sprout as I analyze the mutations that are pointed at for this argument; the organism never gains something that is not beyond or already in its DNA code. For example, I saw pictures of a two headed bull (obvious mutation), but the other head was a bull head not of another specie (Something all ready in its DNA code to produce). Evolutionist have to believe that the mutations in the past are not the same as today which is completely opposite of the the main stream thinking of “Today is the key to the Past.”
Both sides take belief beyond a certain point, it is now the time we anchor our intellects and proceed with our emotions or as it is commonly said our hearts. Right and Wrong. What is it in us that deciphers an act as moral or immoral? Is it years of society imbedding the concept in our hearts that to murder, lie, steal, is wrong? Or is it a God given conscience of the Ten Commandments? Either way the idea is there. And is there a penalty for disobeying our conscience..if God is real then His judgment is real. If God isn’t real what on Earth are we doing here? | | | | | From: |
br | 2003-05-29 14:37:33 | | Subject: | ok | | Comment: | To all with a thinking mind, “Either there is a God or there is not a god, both are scary to ponder.”(Unknown). It has seemed to be a journey, for most, in life to seek truth and understanding. The first question I asked myself was is there a God? But I have found that question can’t be answered simply. If there were a God/ Creator than explaining in the fullness of Him would be impossible, for reasons that a creator is above and beyond their creation. So looking at both sides of the coin, when I say coin I mean God or Evolution because those are the only two rational choices presented before us, lets us first identify with the “God is real” side. What causes someone to believe in God/Creator? Most conclude that the natural surroundings take heed for the existence of God all the way form the unexplainable order of the utter depths of our solar system down to the complexity of a cell. Is that good enough reason to believe in God? For most is, but not everyone feels that way so there is a certain level of belief that is needed. | | | | | From: |
I See Your Point But . . | 2004-02-01 11:14:33 | | Subject: | Placebo?? | | Comment: | After a weird and wonderful read through it seems most are missing the point. U could make up thousands of excuses for either side of the christian v atheist arguement. great thinkers can be counted by opposing great thinkers all day long. What it comes down to is, 'How do u view Jesus?' Was he made up? why then is there so much evidence to the contrary - even from jewish historians. If he was real, then, like CS Lewis says, he must either be a madman, or truely the Son of God. What decsion you come to from that is up to everyone. | | | | | From: |
Brenden | 2004-02-12 22:30:22 | | Subject: | God | | Comment: | 'If naturalism were true then all thoughts whatever would be wholly the result of irrational causes...it cuts its own throat.' C.S. Lewis
The truth is, is that one day God’s mercy is going to stop. There is coming a day that His mercy will be cut off forever and every life that has ever lived will give an account to Jesus Christ. You can blame it on people, circumstances or mindless philosophy, but deceiving yourself with empty words will not hold any weight at the judgment seat. You know it and inside you probably feel it. Why else would there be so much anger built up. I beg you to repent and live for Christ, for nothing else matters. | | | | | From: |
franypoo | 2004-03-02 12:27:01 | | Subject: | it's not just evolution | | Comment: | nor is it just 'was jesus historical.' there are plenty of other explainations on who jesus was, regardless of his historicity. but jesus definitely believed in the bible, so if the new testament's protrayal of jesus is accurate, then it is also dependent on genesis, which has many more enemies than just evolution. archaeology, which is documentarily relative... i believe my sources, saying that there was nothing at least until a possible and controversial david, that adds up with history; however, there is plenty of evidence that other historical events happening in palestine excluding the would-be isrealites. and you will believe your sources telling you otherwise. there is the documentary hypothesis, which makes one question the reliability of the rest of the bible if the pentateuch is up for grabs. Then when we hit the new testament, there's that ol' canonization controversy, which is important because the protestant view of jesus is completely dependent on their exclusion of other descriptions of jesus, that could have been just as authoritative or otherwise as the current gospels. gnostics had just as much a right as the alleged 'apostle' gospel authors to have their take on the jesus shindig. so was jesus historical? maybe. if so, was he the son of god? maybe. well with all these maybes, maybe we'd better look into it. looking at evolution is a big step towards the 'no' of jesus. | | | |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
