It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Diderot
a reply to: UB2120
"Life springs only from life and mind is derived only from pre-exiting mind. Saying God has nothing to do with evolution is like saying Flash has nothing to do with the videos on Youtube. God created the necessary foundation for which evolution can function."
Much of what you assert as fact are assumptions based upon your faith. For example, there is no reasonable justification to state as a fact that life springs only from life. Also I did not, and would not state that God has nothing to do with evolution.
I am open to the idea that God is real, but I await a reasonable proof.
originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: UB2120
The word of God is the Son and the Son is God. It matters to know God [the Trinity] not just because you are meant to know God but because it is just to know truth.
Time, in my opinion, is the rate at which will/spirit manifests images. God is not outside of time, he created in days/time, and he has said Jesus is his body as well. I think the way God can see the future is not because he is outside of time but because he can see will/spirit/The Holy Ghost. In spirit is where we were before the foundation of the Earth. In spirit is where Jesus always was before Father saw and said be. Just like your dreams come from what is unseen but not from something that is not there.
Oh and the Kingdom of God is within... its Spirit. Visions of the future are visions of the spirit - to be carried away in the spirit.
John 14:10
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
John 14:20
At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
If the future has already happened, and God outside of time, what good would his covenants be? It would be like making a bet on a game that had already been played. No... the future is God's will / Spirit and he sees his spirit and what is in it, but because it is Spirit/will it is malleable or able to be changed... it is will. He can will want he wants but he sees his will.
originally posted by: amazing
I'm all for Creationism AND Evolution. I just do not believe in the literal translation of Genesis. Genesis is the made up story.
And you speak the words Creationist or creationism aren't you really meaning to say Christian Creationism? Let's be clear. There's a big difference between believing in God and believing in Genesis.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: UB2120
Are you not familiar with the Abiogenesis hypothesis?
I am familiar with the hypothesis. To me that is science trying to take God out of the equation.
How God can enliven matter is something we will never be able to comprehend nor replicate.
That doesn't mean science should not try to understand as much as they can, but I feel they should at least be humbled by it.
I don't understand why Science, Philosophy and Religion can't form some sort of partnership. When I say religion I don't mean Christianity. To me, to get a better grasp you need all three to work together.
originally posted by: UB2120
Out of the theories that try to explain where the universe came from, the concept that a God created it makes the most sense to me. The complexity and elegance of the universe/life is the handy work of a divine and infinite mind. It seems more possible to me that a God is the creator of all things and beings than the concept that everything is an accident. There seems to be too much that is just right for it to be an accident. We see pattern everywhere.
originally posted by: UB2120
But it is the bestowals of life and mind that are the biggest aspects that lean me toward believing in a personal God. We are something more than animals. Saying that something must be proven to be real invalidates emotions. You can say you love someone, but you can never prove it. Or at least prove it to the satisfaction of everyone. You could go through all the motions of acting like you loved someone but really not. The only proof one human can offer another concerning God is their own personal experience.
originally posted by: UB2120
If you choose not to believe, have faith, there is nothing wrong with that. You have that choice. God compels no one to believe in him. You will not go to hell, there is no such place. I believe the antagonism that many have toward the concept of God is due to there exposure to Christianity. It crystallized long ago in a different time and is just incompatible with many of today's people.
originally posted by: UB2120
I do personally believe that everyone is given a chance to make an informed decision concerning the prospects of eternal life. I believe that once born into the universe we have the potential to be here a long time. We must grow and develop. If you decide it's not for you, that is your choice.
originally posted by: UB2120
Excepting that God created the universe/life does not take away from the scientific thrill of discovering how his will is manifested in time and space. It is still something to marvel at. In the end both science and religion are seeking the source. To science God is a cause, to philosophy an idea, to religion a person, even the loving heavenly Father.
originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: UB2120
Oh you're Urantian.
I don't understand how you can you relate to that book and/or philosophy. It sounds like a comic book that takes things from reality and then turns it into abstract story telling. Is there anything in it that deals with the human experience, which helps you understand day to day life?
I guess what I'm asking is: What gives you faith in The Urantia Book? And is there anything in it which gives you better understanding of the world / reality like the Bible does?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: UB2120
Science and religion are like oil and water. I said earlier that religion makes assumptions then tries to get evidence to fit those assumptions. Science finds evidence and then comes up with an explanation for that evidence. There is a big difference there, and that difference makes them incompatible. If you let religion guide your science then it can lead to bad conclusions since religion will give you a confirmation bias. Like I said, there is nothing wrong with being religious and a scientist, but make no mistake you NEVER bring your religion into science.
Philosophy and science are kind of linked anyways since philosophy is a good source for hypotheses to test, but you certainly should never use it to prove anything since philosophy is just ideas.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: UB2120
You see, everything you just said are all assumptions. None of that is proven and until it is, it is just as valid as me saying that a flying spaghetti monster is our god (man I thought I'd never have to use that cliche...). Though if what you just said is what you believe, that's fine. Just don't let your beliefs contradict established science. Cutting edge science is shaky ground so it may be alright to contradict that; but if it becomes established science and still contradicts your beliefs, you need to change your beliefs.
originally posted by: UB2120
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: UB2120
You see, everything you just said are all assumptions. None of that is proven and until it is, it is just as valid as me saying that a flying spaghetti monster is our god (man I thought I'd never have to use that cliche...). Though if what you just said is what you believe, that's fine. Just don't let your beliefs contradict established science. Cutting edge science is shaky ground so it may be alright to contradict that; but if it becomes established science and still contradicts your beliefs, you need to change your beliefs.
Thus far no science has contradicted my beliefs, really. I believe the currently excepted age of the universe is way low, but it doesn't impact my beliefs. Just as you say I make assumptions that God created the universe and life, so has science made assumptions in this area too. There is no more evidence of the Big Bang, Mulitverses or life starting by mixing just the right amino acids than there is of a God.
So please tell me what science you believe contradicts the existence of God? I assume you base your understanding of God on the Christian teachings and if so perhaps I can supply you a couple links to information that might make you think slightly differently.