It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
For the first time I also realized that if Jesus really did come back, I was in big trouble. At the end of the book was a prayer on how to receive Christ, which I did.
originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: spygeek
Well at least I found someone who will tell me exactly how things are, how nice of you.
Of course you wouldn't call the genesis creation myth biogenesis; God is not a biological organism. In this context, genesis alone would mean simply the creation of life from nothing.. perhaps 'theogenesis' is more appropriate.
For someone able to see blue for a feeling and a believer for an atheist as you heavily insisted upon, it's interesting that you would say that.
Theogenesis is nor more appropriate at all because genesis is a word coined for that particular theory. Of course, one could argue that it is not a theory, yet the theo in theogenesis is actually the theo in theory.
It is a common misconception oft repeated that education is derived from this, but it most certainly is not.
Interesting how you claim things that go against truth. A pattern maybe.
Studies have repeatedly found that the more degrees and higher the level of education of a person has, the less likely they are to hold a strong religious conviction, and the more likely it is that they will be agnostic or atheistic.
I know what I'll do: try a thought experiment. Everybody likes those.
Not a lot of people believed in wireless oversea communication in 1802. Even the doctors of physics.
Now if for some reason wireless overseas communication becomes a thing of the past, in any kind of mad max story, the only ones knowing that it has in fact been seen would be those who give credence of the stories passed down to them. Are they ignorant fools who should be educated about the mythological nature of these claims?
You clearly know very little about what material science says about the origin of the universe, and life itself.
Here we go again. Material science says all things are one at the micro and macro level, just energy and spacetime usually sphering up and revolving around spheres, and in the middle is the trees, the birds and the people, who may or may not have been generated spontaneously from soup.
(No! material science says something else!) Well sure it does bud, anything you observe for yourself and reproduce until you draw a conclusion unchallenged by other reproducible experiment is part of that.)
As for the account of genesis interesting that you would bring up a piece of it.
If you think I distort evolution by calling it soup to monkey, let's again be reminded that the book you quote from may very well have been at some point during the transmission to you handled by the sort of people who claim that educare is not a prefixed construct of ducere, a verifiable linguistic science point, and that makes for all sorts of interesting results.
Did God come from nothing/something? Did God not create the universe from nothing/something spontaneously, as described in the bible? It's the same stretch.
First question is great: God doesn't seem like a effect but rather a cause, not coming from & c.
This sharply contrasts with theories claiming the start of spacetime as spontaneous.
Second is not: you misuse the concept of spontaneity, then say it is described in the bible, which it isn't.
Definitely not the same stretch, and a key point of understanding.
1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light...
1. performed or occurring as a result of a sudden impulse or inclination and without premeditation or external stimulus.
Physical evidence would include all of physical evidence.
Experimental evidence requires genesis, such as programmatic genesis, for lack of understanding of grammatic genesis.
Some do say this however, and I wish them the best until they say their science contradicts this, because frankly I would love to see that, because it would change some of my life choices quite drastically.
The root of the term "genesis" predates the story of creation in the bible, and comes from the latin word for "generation".
The latin root of "genesis" is related to the greek "gignesthai", which means "to be born".
ironic claim. the root of "education" is not "ex ducere", it is "educare". would you like a reference?
See the 'a' in "educate"? That precludes a 'ducere' latin root. This is basic level etymology.
again, educAtion is derived from educAre. this is basic etymology. yes, the latin 'educare' and 'ducere' do have somewhat related or similar meanings, but 'educare' is where the english educate comes from.
The old argument from first cause is fallacious.
We have experimental evidence of abiogenesis, which is a form of programmatic genesis. 'Theistic-genesis' is untestable.
I fear we are getting way off topic and derailing the thread Wisvol, would you like to continue this discussion privately?
originally posted by: drevill
a reply to: ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
There is no correlation,
Off the top of my head, Newton was one highly intelligent chap.
In 2009 a survey of scientists found 33% beloved in God and an addition 18% in some other higher spirit/power
You can argue Einstein
The list goes on
People are hard to govern. The rulers interfere with too much. That is why people are hard to govern. [Tao Te Ching chapter 75]
originally posted by: grahag
So if a voice claiming to be God tells you to kill your neighbor and his family, would you do it without question?
In my opinion, this is the best question to ask anyone who believes in God as their heavenly father and Jesus as their personal savior.
There is precedent in the bible of this happening, so it's a valid question that deserves an answer. If someone feels they have been chosen by God, then they'd have to answer truthfully.