Grey Acumen said: Andir said: Phendrana said: /sarcasm? No, just because they couldn' understand it, it MUST mean that God exists. just because they think they do understand it, it MUST mean that God doesn't exist.

Yes, I think I do have an understanding of evolution, or at least a much better understanding of it than jer133, and I never once said that evolution disproves God.

Andir said: appolose said: Andir "So, I ask any of you. Why does God need preachers? Why does God need churches? Why does God need the 10 Commandments? Why does God need the Bible? Why does God need these tools if he is all powerful and wise? If he really does exist, why does he need to make statues bleed to keep you believing? Why does he need you to believe? Why does he need you to follow his rules in order to have a wonderful afterlife? Are you sure your praying to a higher all loving power, or are you supporting an alien being controlling certain aspects of your life?" While he certainly doesn't need all those, it has not been said that He does. What has been is that He wants those things, the parts that humans themseves control. Why he does not intervene himself is: (1) He already has (see my post concerning universal knowledge). (2) I would asert that if He did perform the things that he requires of his followers, it would destroy is highest desire, the desire that we have free will. Why that would destroy free will is for another discussion. Tombi, you say that evolution (evolution, meaning change in descendents or information increase) is on the opposite pole of randomness and chance. This does not work for two reasons: First, natural selection does not necessarily mean the strongest will survive, it means that the strongest have a better chance. Second, random mutation is needed for the other type of evolution. That is a major, major component to the idea. Note that the word there is "random". Andir: Christian Creationist Theology asserts that there were no design flaws. After the fall (resultant of free will, mind you), then all that happened. On a side note, webbed fingers and toes does not have mean they are for swimming. Why does he want those things?  What does God need with a starship?  That was the original statement, but you twisted it.  If there is a God, why does he need you to pray to him?  Sorry, why does he "want" these things.  Maybe the one word difference confused you.  What would God want with a church?  Is he so egotistical that he needs (sorry, wants) people to worship him?  If so, why should God get what he wants in exchange for your labor?  Why should you work extra hard so that this one thing can have it's desires, yet you go without? And while these webs may not be for swimming, but what would you use them for?  Over time, they would get bigger and you'd turn into a bat with a flap of skin to fly?  Either way, the patterns denotes travel.  To get away.  Deformations are Natures way of evolving.  Now, Humans for centuries have been killing off those mutations to maintain what they think is the proper course of nature.

I was not twisting anything. There is a legitimate differnec between want and need. Need means he must, and since God is all-powerful, he wouldn't need. If your wondering why he wants people to worship (read love), you might ask yourself the same question. We ALL want to love and be loved, and so does does God, and that's not egotiscal. And if it were, then God, owner of everything and deserver of praise, would be justified to be so. Concerning the webbed feet, I was trying only to point out that it doesn't mean swimming.

tombi123 said: appolose said: Tombi, you say that evolution (evolution, meaning change in descendents or information increase) is on the opposite pole of randomness and chance. This does not work for two reasons: First, natural selection does not necessarily mean the strongest will survive, it means that the strongest have a better chance. Second, random mutation is needed for the other type of evolution. That is a major, major component to the idea. Note that the word there is "random".  1) The most adaptive species survive not the strongest, thats evolution. 2) The mutations ARE random, but the mutations that survive and the mutations that die ARE NOT random.

Yes, that' s what I meant by strongest. Again, thats tend to survive. A slighty quicker prey will not necessarily escape its predator. Again, natural selection is less random, but random mutation must first occur. Creatures do NOT necessarily mutate to meet their needs. They have to get lucky for that, because its random. That part is left entirely up to luck.

appolose said: tombi123 said: appolose said: Tombi, you say that evolution (evolution, meaning change in descendents or information increase) is on the opposite pole of randomness and chance. This does not work for two reasons: First, natural selection does not necessarily mean the strongest will survive, it means that the strongest have a better chance. Second, random mutation is needed for the other type of evolution. That is a major, major component to the idea. Note that the word there is "random".  1) The most adaptive species survive not the strongest, thats evolution. 2) The mutations ARE random, but the mutations that survive and the mutations that die ARE NOT random.    Yes, that' s what I meant by strongest. Again, thats tend to survive. A slighty quicker prey will not necessarily escape its predator. Again, natural selection is less random, but random mutation must first occur. Creatures do NOT necessarily mutate to meet their needs. They have to get lucky for that, because its random. That part is left entirely up to luck.

The mistake you are making is that you are looking at it from an individuals perspective. In general the slowest prey will get caught by the predator and the quickest will survive. Therefore in general the 'quickest' gene survives. So the 'quick' gene generally gets passed down the generations. And the 'slow' gene dies out (extinct). In other words, it isn't by chance or random that the 'quick' gene survived and the 'slow' gene died.

Most mutations make no difference. The gene mutations that hinder the animals chances of survival ('slow' gene) generally go extinct. The gene mutations that help the animals chances of survival ('quick' gene) generally survive. 

Also, evolution has no will. 

appolose said: Andir said: appolose said: Andir "So, I ask any of you. Why does God need preachers? Why does God need churches? Why does God need the 10 Commandments? Why does God need the Bible? Why does God need these tools if he is all powerful and wise? If he really does exist, why does he need to make statues bleed to keep you believing? Why does he need you to believe? Why does he need you to follow his rules in order to have a wonderful afterlife? Are you sure your praying to a higher all loving power, or are you supporting an alien being controlling certain aspects of your life?" While he certainly doesn't need all those, it has not been said that He does. What has been is that He wants those things, the parts that humans themseves control. Why he does not intervene himself is: (1) He already has (see my post concerning universal knowledge). (2) I would asert that if He did perform the things that he requires of his followers, it would destroy is highest desire, the desire that we have free will. Why that would destroy free will is for another discussion. Tombi, you say that evolution (evolution, meaning change in descendents or information increase) is on the opposite pole of randomness and chance. This does not work for two reasons: First, natural selection does not necessarily mean the strongest will survive, it means that the strongest have a better chance. Second, random mutation is needed for the other type of evolution. That is a major, major component to the idea. Note that the word there is "random". Andir: Christian Creationist Theology asserts that there were no design flaws. After the fall (resultant of free will, mind you), then all that happened. On a side note, webbed fingers and toes does not have mean they are for swimming. Why does he want those things?  What does God need with a starship?  That was the original statement, but you twisted it.  If there is a God, why does he need you to pray to him?  Sorry, why does he "want" these things.  Maybe the one word difference confused you.  What would God want with a church?  Is he so egotistical that he needs (sorry, wants) people to worship him?  If so, why should God get what he wants in exchange for your labor?  Why should you work extra hard so that this one thing can have it's desires, yet you go without? And while these webs may not be for swimming, but what would you use them for?  Over time, they would get bigger and you'd turn into a bat with a flap of skin to fly?  Either way, the patterns denotes travel.  To get away.  Deformations are Natures way of evolving.  Now, Humans for centuries have been killing off those mutations to maintain what they think is the proper course of nature.   I was not twisting anything. There is a legitimate differnec between want and need. Need means he must, and since God is all-powerful, he wouldn't need. If your wondering why he wants people to worship (read love), you might ask yourself the same question. We ALL want to love and be loved, and so does does God, and that's not egotiscal. And if it were, then God, owner of everything and deserver of praise, would be justified to be so. Concerning the webbed feet, I was trying only to point out that it doesn't mean swimming.

 So, if you don't give God your love, then you shall be forced to live an eternity of suffering?  How is this any different than a "need"?  If he doesn't need you to love him, why would you be threatened with eternal damnnation for not doing as your told?  Why does he need to strike fear into you to get what he "wants"?

The Playstation. Obviously there is a loving God if He allowed Sony to smite Nintendo. On the other hand Nintendo was allowed to create crap in the first place. This proves the existance of Satan. Or something like that.

appolose said: senseinobaka said: appolose said: Of course, Death could not be tortured forever. But then again, if the lake of fire is total annihilation, then Death could not be destroyed either, since death is merely a physical process in your context. I would postulate that Death as it is refered to here is meaning, therefore, something else. Now, in Revelations 20:10, it says "And the devil... was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. " In Matthew 25:41, concerning the unsaved it states "Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angles." Also, on being called the second death: this does not necessarily imply nonexistence. The first death, physical death, does no mean the non-existence of the body, but the seperation of the spirit and the body. So the second death does not mean the nonexistence of anything, as did neither the first. The second death could even be thought of as (you may be aware of this idea) the spirit's seperation from God himself. 1) Death is very destroyable. Remember death is the result of Adamic Sin and Jesus Ransom repurchases us from adamic sin. Under God's kingdom Adamic Sin and Death will no longer exist. They will be destroyed. 2 )You mention Rev 20:10. You obviously understand who the devil is, but do you know who the beast and prophet is? That entails a very long discussion of revelation that I'm not going to get into. But I will mention something I said later in the post you quoted. The lake of fire and the lake of burning sulfur are allusions or references to an actual place that tangibly existed. The place is called Gehenna and it was a trash dump that was on fire 24/7 and smelt as sulfur. It pictures destruction as if by fire, or a ceasing to exist. Second Death, from which there is no ressurection. 3)Torment is translated from the "basanistes" It literally means 'jailers'. The idea being that Satan's imprisonment to everlasting destruction is indeed torment. It is different than the idea of torture and suffering that is derived from the greek word "basanizo" which literally means 'test by the proving stone or torture.' 4)Eccl. 9:4-6,10 specifically mentions the state of those who die from adamic sin. The are not conscious of anything. The are simply dead. The teaching of an immortal soul is not found within the bible. That is another "weed" that was infiltrated from the Hellenic religions. If you want proof turn your bible to Genesis 2:7. Here the bible specifically says that God breathed the breath of life and the man came to be a living soul. It does not say that the man was giving an immortal soul. The word soul is derived from the Hebrew word "nephesh" which literally means 'a breather; being' and the greek word "psyche". Nephesh describes living things, such as humans and animals. The word does not describe spirit creatures. Spirit creatres are described by the word "ruach" in hebrew and "pneuma" in Greek and are never used to describe any part of a human. 5)Second death does represent eternal destruction. Those going thru second death have no hope of resurrection. They will be destroyed forever. Those going thru second death are said to be thrown into the garbage dump gehenna, the place that burns with sulfur, and destroyed (not tortured).   Death isn't destroyable, as one cannot destroy a process, as destruction would entail a tangible object, not process. Also, again I do not think that usage of the word Death refers to that in that way. Concerning the allusion to Gehenna; I would say that he was using that place to compare it to another place, one that also existed, just as tangible, as is heaven and anything else spiritual. Also I would disagree with your statement that that it represents nonexistence; I see no inference of that idea in the imagery. The immortal soul is mentioned in the Bible. 2nd Cor. 5:8 syas when one is absent from the body, they are present with the Lord. How could one be absent from all that he is? Nor is that a ressurection, if it was, then the body would be present with the Lord. Furthermore, if Christ's death and adamic death are only bodily consequnce, then how are the unsaved going to go through judgement and a second death? They couldn't be around for that, since they were not resurrected. Concerning the literal meaning of nepesh; for the man, it entails more than just physical life. It was man and only man that received the breath of life, only man that was made in His image, not the animals. Of course, God has no physical image, so that can't be what God is referring to. Also, as men are not wholly spiritual creatures, the Bible would not refer to them in the "ruach" and "pneuma" words. Also, since Satan and humans will be thrown into the same place, why would one group be destroyed and the other imprisoned only? Finally, what does "eternal" destruction mean" If it means gone forever, then just "destroyed" would suffice.

I think you are purposefully missing the point. Rev 20 and 21 are very specific on what will happen to death. Rev 21:4 spells it out word by word. "Death will be no more." Anyway you slice it, the bible teaches that death will cease to exist under God's Kingdom.

Gehenna = destruction or nonexistence because everything that is thrown into Gehenna are things/entities that god is getting rid of eternally. Satan, angels that follow satan, people that follow satan, death, the grave (hades), Rev 21:4 enumerates other things such as suffering, pain, sickness, and sorrow. Think of it illustratively, Gods kingdom is Jerusalem (not the actual city), often called new Jerusalem, and all the things that will not be in New Jerusalem will be placed into Gehenna, Jerusalem's trashcan.

You mention a concern that if adamic death is just physical then unbelievers wouldnt get judged. I have found that many christians harbor this feeling that it would be terrible if all the unbelievers didnt get whats coming to them. Personally, as a christian I think this attitude shows a sense of resentment to others. And it's contrary to what the bible teaches. First, gods feeling about humans is recorded at 1 Tim 2:3,4 where it is said that it is gods will that all sorts of men be saved, not just those professing religous zealotry. It isnt gods desire to judge people adversely and destroy them, he wants them to live. This is further illustrated by what is said at Acts 24:15 where it specifically says that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous. Both groups enjoy the ransom sacrafice and are made clean from adamic sin when they die. This is a hard concept for many christians to get, but Romans says that when someone dies no matter how much of a sinner they were, they are forgiven of there sins because death is the price they owe. Professed christians don't like this bible teaching because it doesnt punish and torture the unbelievers in eternal hellfire, an attitude that is not christian at all.

 

The Bible's teachings on Soul creatures and Spirit Creatures is very involved. This may not be the proper forum to discuss these teachings, but I would be happy to if you want. I want to mention a few things about it in response to your post tho. Just some tidbits.

1)You feel that 2 Cor has to only be talking about an immortal soul, despite the lack of any use of the word in any form. 2 Cor 5 is a chapter that has alot of information and one scripture taken out of context does not paint the picture.

2)You claim that humans are some kind of soul/spirit hybrid. Genesis does not say that. They are just a soul.

3)Soul in modern laguage has taken on a very different meaning then the language used in the bible. Today soul literally means spirit. In the bible soul and spirit are seperate kind of creatures. I like to think in a scientific way, so let me use the example of taxonomy.

Science has identified 5 Kingdoms of animals. I will like to submit that there is a category above Kingdom. Lets call it Realm. In this Category there are two columns. Column 1 is Soul and includes the 5 Kingdoms we know. Column two is Spirit and under that we have the different spirit creatures that the bible talks about; Angels, Cherubs, Jesus, and God which is Jehovah or Yahweh in hebrew. Humans, us, are clearly classigied as being in the realm of soul and the kingdom of animal. We dont cross that realm line in anyway.

Andir said: appolose said: Andir said: appolose said: Andir "So, I ask any of you. Why does God need preachers? Why does God need churches? Why does God need the 10 Commandments? Why does God need the Bible? Why does God need these tools if he is all powerful and wise? If he really does exist, why does he need to make statues bleed to keep you believing? Why does he need you to believe? Why does he need you to follow his rules in order to have a wonderful afterlife? Are you sure your praying to a higher all loving power, or are you supporting an alien being controlling certain aspects of your life?" While he certainly doesn't need all those, it has not been said that He does. What has been is that He wants those things, the parts that humans themseves control. Why he does not intervene himself is: (1) He already has (see my post concerning universal knowledge). (2) I would asert that if He did perform the things that he requires of his followers, it would destroy is highest desire, the desire that we have free will. Why that would destroy free will is for another discussion. Tombi, you say that evolution (evolution, meaning change in descendents or information increase) is on the opposite pole of randomness and chance. This does not work for two reasons: First, natural selection does not necessarily mean the strongest will survive, it means that the strongest have a better chance. Second, random mutation is needed for the other type of evolution. That is a major, major component to the idea. Note that the word there is "random". Andir: Christian Creationist Theology asserts that there were no design flaws. After the fall (resultant of free will, mind you), then all that happened. On a side note, webbed fingers and toes does not have mean they are for swimming. Why does he want those things? What does God need with a starship? That was the original statement, but you twisted it. If there is a God, why does he need you to pray to him? Sorry, why does he "want" these things. Maybe the one word difference confused you. What would God want with a church? Is he so egotistical that he needs (sorry, wants) people to worship him? If so, why should God get what he wants in exchange for your labor? Why should you work extra hard so that this one thing can have it's desires, yet you go without? And while these webs may not be for swimming, but what would you use them for? Over time, they would get bigger and you'd turn into a bat with a flap of skin to fly? Either way, the patterns denotes travel. To get away. Deformations are Natures way of evolving. Now, Humans for centuries have been killing off those mutations to maintain what they think is the proper course of nature.   I was not twisting anything. There is a legitimate differnec between want and need. Need means he must, and since God is all-powerful, he wouldn't need. If your wondering why he wants people to worship (read love), you might ask yourself the same question. We ALL want to love and be loved, and so does does God, and that's not egotiscal. And if it were, then God, owner of everything and deserver of praise, would be justified to be so. Concerning the webbed feet, I was trying only to point out that it doesn't mean swimming. So, if you don't give God your love, then you shall be forced to live an eternity of suffering? How is this any different than a "need"? If he doesn't need you to love him, why would you be threatened with eternal damnnation for not doing as your told? Why does he need to strike fear into you to get what he "wants"?

 Please go back and read some of my earlier posts. The bible is very specific about sin and death and it doesnt teach that the dead will be tortured eternally in hellfire. Thats is actually a teaching that has been assimilated into mainstream christianity from anicient pagan religions.

Phendrana said: Grey Acumen said: Andir said: Phendrana said: /sarcasm? No, just because they couldn' understand it, it MUST mean that God exists. just because they think they do understand it, it MUST mean that God doesn't exist. Yes, I think I do have an understanding of evolution, or at least a much better understanding of it than jer133, and I never once said that evolution disproves God.

Wasn't reffering to you, or evolution specifically with that piece.

Andir said: So, if you don't give God your love, then you shall be forced to live an eternity of suffering? How is this any different than a "need"? If he doesn't need you to love him, why would you be threatened with eternal damnnation for not doing as your told? Why does he need to strike fear into you to get what he "wants"?

 Hey, my parents told me that if I don't listen to them and eat my veggies I won't grow up healthy, and if I keep playing with matches, I'll get burned, and if I don't look both ways when crossing the street, I'll get hit by a car, and if I accept candy from strangers, I could get kidnapped. Why are they threatening me in order to get what they want!?!

Grow up. 

 

senseinobaka, appolose may be mistaken about death not being destroyable (assuming the existence and willingness of God to do such a thing), but the lake of fire that unbelievers are thrown into is clearly not merely a metaphor for complete nonexistence.

"And the devil... was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

I understand, what with people coming back from the dead at the end, that the Bible's authors might feel the need to specify "destroyed forever" (countering one of appolose's criticisms) but the description of "day and night for ever and ever" just makes no sense at all in that context. "I'm going to kill you, and you'll be dead forever, all seven days of the week. Especially on Tuesdays." It does not make sense to apply an explicit description of something happening on a constant basis to something that happens once and remains that way forever.