Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   
Historical Evidence Against Creationism

Home // Evolution Versus Creationism



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Freddie wrote:

Wrong again as usually LOL but no seriously the word Christian was first used in Antioch to describe followers of Jesus Christ not just believers mind you but those who took on the character of Christ.

Just because you say you believe doesn't make you a Christian. James said "you say you have faith and I have works: show me your faith without your works and I'll show you my faith by my works" If you say you believe but you don't walk the walk then you have a dead faith.

I'm still waiting for you to give me anything to back up your oppinions. You keep telling me I operate of conjecture or on feelings or oppinions but you still haven't suggested anything at all that can be proven. I give you references, inside and outside of the bible. What you keep giving me is this attitude that you speak on behalf of every atheist or agnostic on the planet and have not given any references to back up those opinions.


I've neither stated nor implied that i speak for anyone other than myself.

And you want the definition of a christian? Alright.

Christian:
a religious person who believes Jesus is the Christ and who is a member of a Christian denomination

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/p.....=christian

That's the definition of the word.

Quote:

I think our debate would be much better to present both sides more fully. At this point it seems like an endless circle of me speaking and you saying "so what that's just your opinion". Believe it or not I want to actually understand you better.


If you want to understand someone, you should ask questions rather than proselytizing.
Back to top
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas

PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Freddie wrote:

Wrong again as usually LOL but no seriously the word Christian was first used in Antioch to describe followers of Jesus Christ not just believers mind you but those who took on the character of Christ.

Just because you say you believe doesn't make you a Christian. James said "you say you have faith and I have works: show me your faith without your works and I'll show you my faith by my works" If you say you believe but you don't walk the walk then you have a dead faith.

I'm still waiting for you to give me anything to back up your oppinions. You keep telling me I operate of conjecture or on feelings or oppinions but you still haven't suggested anything at all that can be proven. I give you references, inside and outside of the bible. What you keep giving me is this attitude that you speak on behalf of every atheist or agnostic on the planet and have not given any references to back up those opinions.


I've neither stated nor implied that i speak for anyone other than myself.

And you want the definition of a christian? Alright.

Christian:
a religious person who believes Jesus is the Christ and who is a member of a Christian denomination

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/p.....=christian

That's the definition of the word.

Quote:

I think our debate would be much better to present both sides more fully. At this point it seems like an endless circle of me speaking and you saying "so what that's just your opinion". Believe it or not I want to actually understand you better.


If you want to understand someone, you should ask questions rather than proselytizing.



Again I already gave you the definition of the word Christian as it was used for the first time, what twists it may have been given in secular circles after that point is irrelevent.

Once again I will say I spend my life studying this subject. I don't mind debate but if you can't back up your opinions as you've ask me to do then it's not a debate but more of an arguement which is not helpful to anyone.

You could step up to the plate and answer the questions by which you keep thinking I'm not asking.

You could give me the reason behind your belief. I could go somewhere else and waste my time but honestly I do care enough to continue this. I'll continue it until I'm thrown off the board or until you give up on me but don't think anything I share is out of argument or strife.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Freddie wrote:

Again I already gave you the definition of the word Christian as it was used for the first time, what twists it may have been given in secular circles after that point is irrelevent.


The present meaning of a word is defined by its present usage, not by its historical origins. If you wish to use the word "christian" in a way that it is not presently defined, you need to specify that when you use it. You cannot redefine a word for your own convenience or on account of your own beliefs.

Quote:

You could step up to the plate and answer the questions by which you keep thinking I'm not asking.


If you wish to ask me a question, you must do so explicitly.

Quote:

You could give me the reason behind your belief.


...which belief is that?

You mean, why don't i believe that a god exists?

Because there is no evidence that unequivically points to a god's existing.
Back to top
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Freddie wrote:

Again I already gave you the definition of the word Christian as it was used for the first time, what twists it may have been given in secular circles after that point is irrelevent.


The present meaning of a word is defined by its present usage, not by its historical origins. If you wish to use the word "christian" in a way that it is not presently defined, you need to specify that when you use it. You cannot redefine a word for your own convenience or on account of your own beliefs.

Quote:

You could step up to the plate and answer the questions by which you keep thinking I'm not asking.


If you wish to ask me a question, you must do so explicitly.

Quote:

You could give me the reason behind your belief.


...which belief is that?

You mean, why don't i believe that a god exists?

Because there is no evidence that unequivically points to a god's existing.



I'm confused you are telling me that because people have twisted the meaning of the word that it now means something different and that if I used the word correctly I have to specify Laughing come on man you can do better than that. Seriously that's a weak argument but from now on when I say Christian I'm refering to the correct historical meaning of the word, you know the correct meaning.

Your kind of evasive kat daddy. You don't believe there is enough unequivical evidence but you also know there is no unequivical evidence against the existance of God either so again that's a weak point. If there were there be no debate at all and the entire history of the world would be different.

Give me something that backs up your stand.

Do you really think that everything came into existance after a giant explosion from something no one knows the origen of. Where did the matter come from? Another galaxy? Where did that galaxy come from? Another explosion?

Some where down the line something had to begin this cycle. Look around you, everything that is, has been created in some way shape or form. There is a beginning and an end.

Now lets look at the word "Theory". Earlier on you made a snide remark about gravity and electricity.

Both of those examples are "Laws" when a theory can be proven (not just one time either mind you but tested and retest enough times with repeatable conclusions) then that theory becomes a law.

The big bang "theory" is just that; a theory. The scientist can't prove it and never will be able to prove it.

So basically you're holding faith that the universe is a big accident that can't be proven....hmmm and you wonder about me Laughing. But seriously don't you think it's more likely that the earth is really just a giant snot bubble on the end of a celestial turtle spinning out of control toward oblivian?

It makes about as much sense or logic as you might say. If you really look at the world around you logic bares out intelligent design over big bang.

I'll ask this question. Would you clearify your position? Do you believe in the big bang theory? What is your position on the origen of the world?
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Freddie wrote:

I'm confused you are telling me that because people have twisted the meaning of the word that it now means something different and that if I used the word correctly I have to specify Laughing come on man you can do better than that.


It's the truth. Language evolves.

Quote:

Seriously that's a weak argument but from now on when I say Christian I'm refering to the correct historical meaning of the word, you know the correct meaning.


I'll try my best.

Quote:

Your kind of evasive kat daddy. You don't believe there is enough unequivical evidence but you also know there is no unequivical evidence against the existance of God either so again that's a weak point.


Indeed, i cannot prove that god doesn't exist.

That is, however, irrelevent, because that qualification cannot distinguish between what is and is not true.

For example, you can't prove that i am not the all-powerful creator of the universe. Nor can you prove that i don't own an invisible unicorn. Etc.

And yet, it's reasonable to suppose that i did not create the universe, and it's also reasonable to suppose that i do not own an invisible unicorn.

Quote:

Do you really think that everything came into existance after a giant explosion from something no one knows the origen of. Where did the matter come from? Another galaxy? Where did that galaxy come from? Another explosion?


For starters, i have absolutely no idea where everything came from. I have suspicions, but i have no conclusions or beliefs on the matter.

As for the big bang, well, it wasn't an explosion. The name "big bang" was coined by a man who thought the theory was ridiculous (and so he was making fun of it).

We do know, more or less for a fact, that the universe started really tiny (relative to its present size), and expanded. We also know that it continues to expand. The evidence for those two is pretty straight-forward.

What we are not certain of is how or why. There are a number of very good ideas on the matter, but the evidence thus far isn't all that conclusive. And they're rather complex.

Quote:

Some where down the line something had to begin this cycle. Look around you, everything that is, has been created in some way shape or form. There is a beginning and an end.


There was likely a begining to spacetime as we know it.

There may not be a 'begining' to the universe itself; such terms have no meaning without time.

And there's no way to know if, and when, spacetime will end. If things keep going as they have, it won't end. But no one knwos how things will go in the future.

And then, of course, there's the question of the word 'created'. The universe was almost certainly not 'created' in the sense that we as humans understand the word. (There's one possibility wherein it was created, but in that instance, it's not the result of divine action). When we create things, we take preexisting materials and reorder them.

The origins of the universe are likely quite different from that.

Quote:

Now lets look at the word "Theory". Earlier on you made a snide remark about gravity and electricity.

Both of those examples are "Laws". when a theory can be proven (not just one time either mind you but tested and retest enough times with repeatable conclusions) then that theory becomes a law.


Except that's not the case.

What i told you is accurate. An idea is a hypothesis; a proven idea is a theory.

Exactly what the relationship is between 'laws' and the other two depends on who you ask.

One version has it that laws are proven observations without explanations (and that theories are proven observations with explanations). Newton's law of gravity, for example - it gives the attractive relationship between objects with mass, but it doesn't explain how or why that happens.

Another version has it that laws are a particular sort of theories.

...and really, those two aren't mutually exclusive. They can both be true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.....tific_laws

Quote:

It makes about as much sense or logic as you might say. If you really look at the world around you logic bares out intelligent design over big bang.


Simplistic logic based on very limited observations and little critical thinking might lead one to believe that the world is 'created', yes. That's how the idea first came about.

On closer examination, life isn't quite that simple. If you look at how it works from an actual design perspective, things don't make a whole lot of sense.

Quote:

I'll ask this question. Would you clearify your position? Do you believe in the big bang theory?


In that the universe did expand and is expanding? Yep.
Here's a basic overview of what makes people think that that happened:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B.....l_evidence

Quote:

What is your position on the origen of the world?


It's a ball of rock that gravitationally condensed from stuff in a nebula. (that stuff having come, mostly, from supernova(s) elsewhere)
Back to top
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas

PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Language evolves sure enough but to distort a word to mean something beyond its intended use is fallicy. It's not the word that has changed but the attitude used behind that has changed. It's the same with the word "Saint" the catholic church has distored the meaning and turned it into an office which it is not and never was and thus one can use the word correctly based on it's origen or falsely based on distortion.

To be a Christian hasn't changed even if peoples concept of the word due to poor examples has changed. I stand 100 percent behind the true meaning of the word Christian. That true meaning has a "litmus test" (so to say) attached to it, based on that litmus test it can be determined if some is in fact a Christian.

The information you have provided only shows that the universe changes, I've never contended with that. We know that it does. God created the universe to do this. He created the "laws" that keep things going as they do.

Things are much more simple than we tend to make them out to be. No mater on what level you delve into the make up of the universe something will always lead to something else. That's the way the Lord designed things so that life continues on. This is why we haven't all destroyed ourselves by now LOL.

Look at anphibians for a moment and look at their life cycle how they begin and how they end. How wonderful it is to see how life changes and grows. Some are even known to change gender. Not sexuality mind you but full gender changes. Take two males of a certain kind of frog and keep them together long enough and one will change to female so to be able to continue life to perpetuate. Why does this happen? Because they were created to do so, their make up and dna contains what's needed to make sure they live on. It's not that way will all things sure enough, some have there time and pass away, like the dodo bird.

Life comes from life.

I wonder if you might share with me the real reason you reject God all together? I mean if its too personal of a thing to ask I understand but the arguments I've seen so far really don't elude to anything really. I don't say that in a snide way, what I mean is you are presenting evidence that isn't able to be proven per se just like you say I'm doing so there must be something else. Something deeper. If you don't mind sharing I'd love to hear it.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Freddie wrote:

Look at anphibians for a moment and look at their life cycle how they begin and how they end. How wonderful it is to see how life changes and grows. Some are even known to change gender. Not sexuality mind you but full gender changes. Take two males of a certain kind of frog and keep them together long enough and one will change to female so to be able to continue life to perpetuate. Why does this happen? Because they were created to do so, their make up and dna contains what's needed to make sure they live on. It's not that way will all things sure enough, some have there time and pass away, like the dodo bird.

Life comes from life.


I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I mean, i understand your words, but is there an overall point?

Quote:

I wonder if you might share with me the real reason you reject God all together? I mean if its too personal of a thing to ask I understand but the arguments I've seen so far really don't elude to anything really.


Well, like you said, things are often simpler than we make them out to be.

And i've never stated that i 'reject god altogether'. I don't claim that the existence of god is categorically impossible.

I just don't think he exists. It really is that simple. There's no evidence to suggest that he exists, and so i don't assume that he exists.
Back to top
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas

PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:
Freddie wrote:

Look at anphibians for a moment and look at their life cycle how they begin and how they end. How wonderful it is to see how life changes and grows. Some are even known to change gender. Not sexuality mind you but full gender changes. Take two males of a certain kind of frog and keep them together long enough and one will change to female so to be able to continue life to perpetuate. Why does this happen? Because they were created to do so, their make up and dna contains what's needed to make sure they live on. It's not that way will all things sure enough, some have there time and pass away, like the dodo bird.

Life comes from life.


I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I mean, i understand your words, but is there an overall point?

Quote:

I wonder if you might share with me the real reason you reject God all together? I mean if its too personal of a thing to ask I understand but the arguments I've seen so far really don't elude to anything really.


Well, like you said, things are often simpler than we make them out to be.

And i've never stated that i 'reject god altogether'. I don't claim that the existence of god is categorically impossible.

I just don't think he exists. It really is that simple. There's no evidence to suggest that he exists, and so i don't assume that he exists.


Well I'll get back to that point at another time perhaps, I apologize for not presenting it as I should have but I'll return to it at another time.

Maybe I assumed too much but your argument has been against the idea that God exists. If you don't fully reject the existance of God what exactly is your stand on God?

What keeps you from rejecting Him completely? Is it the unknown?

What if tomorrow you had definitive proof would you still believe life is an accident?

Would you then believe that what we find in the bible and what I and people like me preach is true?

I'm sorry to bombard you with questions and there are more, if you don't mind answering these.

I thank you for continuing to discuss this matter I fully understand you don't half to and every moment we spend doing something is a moment we can't get back, I can only pray that these moments are in some way helpful.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Freddie wrote:

Maybe I assumed too much but your argument has been against the idea that God exists. If you don't fully reject the existance of God what exactly is your stand on God?


You were right - i have been arguing, and do argue, that god doesn't exist.

That's quite different from arguing that he can't exist, though.

I don't consider anything to be strictly impossible, because in order to actually conclude that, i'd have to know everything. Which i don't.

And even with the things i *do* know, i can never be certain. There are always errors in measurements of any kind, and there's always doubt about what my senses are telling me, even if that doubt is very small.

All of my conclusions are therefore tentative.

That is to say, i have concluded - based on what i know - that god doesn't exist.

But, since i dont know everything, that conclusion could change. I would consider the likelihood of it changing to be rather slim (again, based on what i know), but it could still happen.

Quote:

What keeps you from rejecting Him completely? Is it the unknown?


The same reason that i neither accept nor reject anything completely - it's not possible to reasonably have absolute certainty.

Quote:

What if tomorrow you had definitive proof would you still believe life is an accident?

Would you then believe that what we find in the bible and what I and people like me preach is true?


That is, if i were presented with solid, undeniable proof of the existence of the christian god, would i accept it?

Of course. I'm a hard-core skeptic; i'm not delusional.

Quote:

I'm sorry to bombard you with questions and there are more, if you don't mind answering these.


I don't mind answering questions at all.
Back to top
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas

PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
But you know there is not definitive proof of the the science that you choose to believe as correct so I wonder why you choose the direction you choose.

Knowing that humans just to grasps life and knowing we still have so much to learn how can you put so much faith in something like the big bang thoery and discount creation by a higher power?

I'm trying to understand your process of thought. Logic can only take you so far, you yourself know there are naturally accuring things in nature that defy logic.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Freddie wrote:
But you know there is not definitive proof of the the science that you choose to believe as correct so I wonder why you choose the direction you choose.


What do you mean by 'science'?

That is, on one hand there are the facts that science discovers. Those i do not have certainty about - much like with everything. With many of them, i'm very confident, in that they've been demonstrated experimentally to a high degree of precision (thus, the point of science), but i don't believe any of them to be true with absolute certainty.

On the other hand, there's science itself, which is a methodology.My certainty about that is not absolute either, but for a different reason - it's a philosophy, or a way of doing things. It's not a fact about the universe. It is, as far as i can tell, the best way of learning about the universe. I say this because it works. It's possible that there's a better way, but no one's come up with it yet.

Quote:

Knowing that humans just to grasps life and knowing we still have so much to learn how can you put so much faith in something like the big bang thoery and discount creation by a higher power?


There's no faith involved.
For many people, belief is a binary matter - they believe, or they do not believe.
With myself, that is not the case. My 'beliefs' have two parts to them, mostly - acceptance, and certainty. When i accept something, i behave and and make decisions as though it were true. The thing about acceptance, though, is that (with me) it isn't true belief - it can change at any time, and is always subject to doubt. It's just a convenient assumption.

Whether or not i accept something depends on how certain i am about it - and how certain i am about possible alternatives. And i am never totally certain about anything.

My certainty about something is determined, basically, by empirical evidence.

That is why i accept the big bang. The big bang is overwhelmingly supported by empirical evidence (keep in mind that the big bang only says that the universe grew from a tiny size to its present size - it says nothing about where 'stuff' came from).

And that is also why i do not accept a 'higher power' specifically or supernaturalism in general - there is no empirical evidence for it.

Quote:

I'm trying to understand your process of thought. Logic can only take you so far, you yourself know there are naturally accuring things in nature that defy logic.


Logic is what you use for drawing conclusions based on certain premises. Anything is logical, given the right premises.

I assume what you mean is that 'there are naturally occuring things that defy explanation'.

This is true (although most people do not appreciate the way in which it is true - the wierdness is deeper than most know).

That is not a good reason for believing in the supernatural, though. Just because i can not explain something does not mean that i am willing to believe anything to fill in the gaps. I want the truth - the real truth.

All too often, though, people don't even do that much - they don't fill in the gaps with whatever. They suspend their curiosity entirely. Many things that seem like supernatural explanations are really just the renaming the of question so as to dismiss it.

I'm okay with not knowing. I'm not okay with making things up, or avoiding the issue.
Back to top
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas

PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm not ok with avoiding issues or making things up either. If you hold the bible up against matters it does align. So using the same process you use I am more certain about the existance of God than anything else in this life.

This is a subject that one must be absolutly as certain as they can be about. If you choose incorrectly there could be an eternity to regret the decision.

And you are taking science on faith unless you can be 100 percent certain that the answers it provides you are correct and you have already stated that it can't. Why does it scare you so to call it what it is, it is faith. It is faith when you get to the point where you say I can't be certain but I'm just certain enough to bet my life on it.

I've bet my life on Christ, you've but yours on the knowledge of man. Each of us has to make this decision for ourselves and I'm not here to force my belief on you, only to share what I know to be the truth because I care about you. The thought of anyone having to go through "true death" that is an eternal seperation from God and cast into utter darkness hurts me to my core. Why? Because I do love and I do care.

Take it for what it is. I'm sorry I've digressed a little but back to the subject at hand.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218

PostPosted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Freddie wrote:
I'm not ok with avoiding issues or making things up either. If you hold the bible up against matters it does align. So using the same process you use I am more certain about the existance of God than anything else in this life.


I'll give you an example.

Where does the universe (and everything in it) come from?

Christianity says that god did it.

But what does that mean?
Well, the bible says he spoke it into existence.

But that just begs the question - what does that mean? How does that work?

Some might say "we're not meant to know", or, "it's beyond our comprehension".

And both of those things are what i'm talking about: it's avoiding the question. It's giving up on curiosity.

Quote:

This is a subject that one must be absolutly as certain as they can be about. If you choose incorrectly there could be an eternity to regret the decision.


There are two responses to that, that come to my mind.

The first one is that an eternity of suffering doesn't worry me. Neither does true death. And even if christianity is true, it may be the case that i'm morally obliged to go to hell - i disagree with the christian outlook on a number of matters, and to change my mind just because god says so would be dishonest, to myself and to others.

The second one is math.
That is, let's assume i care about what happens after i die. What then?
In order to make an informed decision on what to believe, i need evidence.
But, the thing is, the evidence for all religions is exactly the same: none. If i am to decide amongst them, that decision would have to be arbitrary in nature.

And it gets worse. What if the religions that people follow today are all wrong? What if there's a supernatural force that sends unbelievers to hell, and no one knows that it exists? Those have to be taken into account as well.
And how many possible variations of those are there?
An infinite number.

So, what are the odds of me guessing the right religion?

1/∞

The limit of 1/x, as x goes to ∞, is zero.

It's basically impossible to choose the right religion.

Quote:

And you are taking science on faith unless you can be 100 percent certain that the answers it provides you are correct and you have already stated that it can't.


It's the other way around.

You're assuming that one needs to be totally confident of a conclusion in order to use it or 'believe' it; so, if someone isn't actually 100% certain about a conclusion, he must be filling in the rest of the space with faith.

That is incorrect. I do not have total confidence in my conclusions, and as i said before, 'belief' is not binary where i am concerned - there are many shades of gray in between 'belief' and 'unbelief'.

Quote:

Why does it scare you so to call it what it is, it is faith. It is faith when you get to the point where you say I can't be certain but I'm just certain enough to bet my life on it.


No, it's faith when you decide that you are more certain about a matter than evidence allows for.

Betting your life on something is only faith when you think 'i KNOW this will work!'.


Quote:
The thought of anyone having to go through "true death" that is an eternal seperation from God and cast into utter darkness hurts me to my core.


I accept it as a fact of life. I fully expect to die.
Back to top
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas

PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Exton I've truly enjoyed our conversation and I will address your last statements soon, I need to give everything you've said full attention and I can't right at the moment, I'll be back Monday or Tuesday please bare with me.

Many blessings.
Back to top
Freddie
Not a Newbie
Not a Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Location: Arkansas

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm sorry Ex, for the delay in my response. I've been under considerable attack by life. I don't mind sharing that with you. Some make it a point to hide strife in there life afraid it is some sort of bad testimony but in truth even the Apostle Paul who went through great tribulations in his life time did not hide his problems from others.

Instead we glorify God for bringing us through them and giving us strength. I don't say this to create more debate only to give you the knowledge that I've not forgotten you nor this disscussion only that I've had to give attention to some other things.

Anyway I digress.

Ex, I want you to know that this that you've said sounds exactly like the things I said once in my life. I didn't care about heaven or hell.

The problem is you don't understand hell. You don't believe it enough to be concerned I understand but hell is not something, I can assure you that is a triffle.

It's eternal and it's relentless. There is no break and no repre. An eternity in hell is just that an eternity. It's not something we can get used to either, like spending life in prison where a person can adjust to the surroundings and cope. It's not like having a sever burn where your body can eventual heal it's self or you can get used to the pain enough to endure.

If you think there is any way what so ever that hell exists please please run it out. Don't take it so lightly. Give some time to study. You know you can't be 100% certain so you have to understand that the one percent you speak of is enough of a chance to be certain of what you affirm, 100% certain because if you are wrong then you'll have eternity to regret.
Back to top


Post new topic   Reply to topic   Quick Reply    LVC Home // Evolution Versus Creationism All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 6 of 8

 

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Add to My Yahoo! Add to Google

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites Politics Blogs Politics
Politics blogs Politics blogs Article Directory Political Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory Top Blog Sites