Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - "Miracle" Water Spouting From Tree

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

"Miracle" Water Spouting From Tree
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:12 am Post subject: Re: "Miracle" Water Spouting From Tree

fiveeagles wrote:

huffdaddy wrote:

And how do you know that you aren't making the same silly errors? Even, for the sake of argument, accepting God and the story of creation, there's a whole host of issues involved here. The role of God in writing the Bible, literal versus figurative, allegory, metaphors, ad nauseum. Not to mention copying and translation issues. To flatly assert that God created the universe in 6 days some 6000 years ago takes a ridiculous leap of assumptions that are not in any way, shape or form, vital components of Christianity.

If you would truly analyze the evidence and look at the threads that weave through what you have just mentioned ,you would see the amazingly overwhelming amount of evidence that supports faith in Christ. There are many good books and sites that support this.

I'm not talking about faith in Christ. I'm talking about the creation and interpration of the Bible by mortal men. And how it is misused by Christians. Creating theories based upon religious principles and not scientific principles has not served the church well. Will they ever learn?

Besides, if you need evidence, it's not faith now, is it.

Quote:

In the end, religion, including Christianity, shouldn't be about where we came from, but rather where we are and where we are going. To invest the credibility of the church in things like an Earth-centered universe, the Shroud of Turin, crying Madonnas, water sprouting trees, and evolution is doing more to destroy you than any athiest ever could.

If we don't know where we came from, then we don't know where we are going. Jesus Christ is the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last. He was, He is and He is yet to come. Through Him all things were created and without him nothing would exist. Whether it's 6000 or 100 mil, we still have to figure it out.

You're right. History is important. And Christians should take a look at their history of misinterpreting the Bible to conform to their mortal beliefs and social norms. I think the the diminishing role of Christianity has as much to do with this erroneous religious hegemony as anything else.

Quote:

And Noah's Ark?? The only evidence I've seen supporting the 6000 year old Earth is that eveything can be explained by "God's hand."

Interestingly enough. Some guys on Fox news claim to have evidence to where it is. Mt. Solomon(sp?) in Iran.

What about the site in Turkey? Anyways, it's hardly important. I was saying Christianity should rely on their faith, and not finding "evidence" of the God or the Bible. The "miraculous" appearance of water from a tree shouldn't be used as proof of God's existence. Because all you get is being bit by the scientific explanation and looking like a fool. See also the Earth-centered universe, the existence of witches, slavery, lightening, segregation, the Shroud of Turin, etc.

There are a great many theories of creation. And unless someone tried to impose one of them on me as fact, I'd have nothing bad to say about any of them. They're harmless relics of simpler times. A common thread of humanity looking to explain their origins. Like Genesis. And the sooner Christians can learn to accept that their faith does not hinge on the literal interpretation of Genesis, the better off they'll be.

fiveeagles

Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver

Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:55 am Post subject: Re: "Miracle" Water Spouting From Tree

huffdaddy wrote:

Christ said that without being born again, one cannot see the kingdom of God. How then would a macro-evolutionary paradygm see the kingdom of God without a confession of sin? How then will or can these two trains of thoughts ever be reconcilled? Which I think is my point. They can't be. You can't believe in macro-evolution and believe in the Christ who died on a cross for our sins.

So yeah, the church has made some errors, but so too have scientists.

Are you better off with nuclear power? Are you happy that the proliferation of nuclear weapons are accelerating with the advance of science and technology? How many diseases can doctors cure? Are you happy with weapons technology and the many ways in which you can die? How many weather systems can we detect in a week's time?

What amazes is me is the willingness of people to throw themselves at man's theories hoping that they will be protected from God's holiness. What do you think Einstein had to say before God when asked about all of his affairs and womanizing. "Well, E=mc2 and so I really didn't believe in you, because I thought I was smarter than you." God probably replied, "Too bad you didn't look deeper into the laws of Christ, because His light would have shined on you and caused greater revelation."

I throw this in here, because like I have previously said, science is not going to be our miracle bullet. It's not going to be the ride in which takes us from this hate ridden earth into a glorious future. Sure, there are some awesome things on the horizon and will have a great impact on society. But for this to happen, we must remain open to the higher laws that superimpose themselves upon the material world. Only with this attitude will we enter a new age of hope and discovery. The unfortunate thing is that the laws of revelation are at war with the laws of disbelief and skepticism. In which macro-evolution is grounded in the latter.

Macro-evolution is an illusion. It's the matrix in which its tentacles are strangling our education systems and interactions of our culture. Slowly guiding us towards a society in which we think Science/Macro-evolution will be the magic ride out of hell/death.

Quote:

Besides, if you need evidence, it's not faith now, is it.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen.

That is why those who have faith in macro-evolution and those who have faith in God can have a bridge towards intelligent discussion.

Quote:

Diminishing role? The role of the church in these last days is going to shake the world. It is going to become the most powerful and glorious institution on this earth. It is going to be the life support for millions and millions.

Quote:

God has always been a God of signs and wonders. He uses these to point people in the directon of His love. Though, not all signs and wonders are from Him, some definitely are. The church meeting I was just at had gold dust appearing on people's hands. In other meetings, diamonds are beginning to appear out of nowhere.

I am not saying this tree is a sign from God, but great things are happening throughout the earth to point towards His mercy. Whereas those who reject His signs and wonders are the one who look like fools upon death.

21:8 But for the cowardly, unbelieving, sinners, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their part is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death."

Quote:

There are a great many theories of creation. And unless someone tried to impose one of them on me as fact, I'd have nothing bad to say about any of them. They're harmless relics of simpler times. A common thread of humanity looking to explain their origins. Like Genesis. And the sooner Christians can learn to accept that their faith does not hinge on the literal interpretation of Genesis, the better off they'll be.

Like I have said, either we have the literal interpretation of Genesis or we don't have anything at all. There's no compromise. It's deception to think otherwise.

mindmetoo

Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 4:54 pm Post subject: Re: "Miracle" Water Spouting From Tree

fiveeagles wrote:

Like I have said, either we have the literal interpretation of Genesis or we don't have anything at all. There's no compromise. It's deception to think otherwise.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. 1.1 billion catholics get along fine with doctrine that says Genesis is allegory, a story meant to convey a message. You got a problem with that?

So, Dover. ID. What you got to say about that St. Peter? When evolution and creationism meet in a venue of fact, logic, and science, guess what wins time and time again?

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 11:19 pm Post subject: Re: "Miracle" Water Spouting From Tree

fiveeagles wrote:

huffdaddy wrote:

And were did I make any claim wrt macro-evolution? My point isn't to push one theory over the other, but to push the openness to any theory. But Christians choose creationism based upon religious doctrine and not scientific doctrine. Doctrine which may or may not be in error from the get go.

Quote:

So yeah, the church has made some errors, but so too have scientists.

The difference is, is that scientists are working hard to prove or disprove theories based upon scientific principle. The church is out to maintain a system that is based upon religious dogma. Religious dogma that is occasionally wrong. Therefore, we either must lay fault in the writer or the interpreter of said dogma. Since I assume you won't blame God, it's the fault of the church. And yet they continue to make the same mistake of interpretation again and again.

Quote:

What amazes is me is the willingness of people to throw themselves at man's theories hoping that they will be protected from God's holiness. What do you think Einstein had to say before God when asked about all of his affairs and womanizing.

"Dude, I'm Jewish," I imagine. What this has to do with scientific fact, I don't know. Are you saying you'd rather have a good Christian-bad scientist than a bad Christian/Jew-great scientist? Even at the expense of scientific fact?

Quote:

The church meeting I was just at had gold dust appearing on people's hands. In other meetings, diamonds are beginning to appear out of nowhere.

Gold dust and diamonds, eh? Now you're starting to sound freaky. RTeacher freaky. How much angel dust is floating around these places?

Quote:

Like I have said, either we have the literal interpretation of Genesis or we don't have anything at all. There's no compromise. It's deception to think otherwise.

Didn't Pope Urban VIII once say about the same thing to Galileo?

mindmetoo

Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:44 pm Post subject:

The problem with the notion that ID is a science is there is no actual science being done. Not one single published experiment in a peer reviewed journal. Having been upbraided constantly by this criticism that they just aren't doing peer reviewed work, the Discovery Institute decided to publish a list of its best peer reviewed work. The problem?

To quote the host of Evolution 101:

Quote:

They begin by showing seven "featured" articles. However, all of them are reviews, or position papers. None of them contain any basic research, and I'm unsure why they would want to "feature" them. Most of them are published in "Proceedings of" journals, which have a slightly different peer review process than other journals. Basically, as long as you can get a member of that particular society to sponsor your paper, it'll be published. The one contribution by Jonathan Wells would seem to be interesting, in that it proposes an experiment, but doesn't actually carry it out. I can't find any follow up papers, and it appears that it was just an abstract that was presented at a conference.

Quote:

I want to repeat- not a single experiment has been published to test a hypothesis advanced by creationism or intelligent design. Not a single one. So sure, there are definitely scientists with real degrees out there, talking about intelligent design, but they can�t perform a single experiment to back up their arguments.

Pathetic, 5eagles. If you were educated in the basics of science, you should know that. Plain 'n' simple.

The notion that we should teach Intelligent Design as a science when NO basic science is being done (unlike real science) is laughable. I believe Bush has recently introduced the notion schools should teach the controversy. The problem is there is no controversy, insofar as science is concerned. Real areas of study under "controversy" have a lot of real science papers arguing back and forth. But when you get a situation where there are 100,000+ papers dealing with evolution and 40 dealing with ID, it's clear there's no controversy. Sure, maybe in the minds of right wing religious literalists but not in science.

fiveeagles

Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 8:49 am Post subject:

mindmetoo wrote:

The notion that we should teach Intelligent Design as a science when NO basic science is being done (unlike real science) is laughable. I believe Bush has recently introduced the notion schools should teach the controversy. The problem is there is no controversy, insofar as science is concerned. Real areas of study under "controversy" have a lot of real science papers arguing back and forth. But when you get a situation where there are 100,000+ papers dealing with evolution and 40 dealing with ID, it's clear there's no controversy. Sure, maybe in the minds of right wing religious literalists but not in science.

Why then do you continue to post when there is no science to it then?

Anyway my computer is broken down again and so I don't have any real time to chat here on Dave's. You have raised some good questions (aside from your insults), I just don't have time to answer right now. Hopefully in a week or so.

laogaiguk

Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:38 pm Post subject:

fiveeagles wrote:

mindmetoo wrote:

If your computer broke, obviously that's what God wanted. Fixing it goes against God and brings a new victory for heartless Athiestic science!

mindmetoo

Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:00 pm Post subject:

fiveeagles wrote:

Why then do you continue to post when there is no science to it then?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. To point out to people like you that believe it is science.

Next.

Rteacher

Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:41 pm Post subject:

It can be scientific - without strictly being science per se - in the sense that it relates to science. It's probably best suited for presentation in philosophy of science classes for its critique of the limitations of science

mindmetoo

Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:44 pm Post subject:

Rteacher wrote:

It can be scientific - without strictly being science per se - in the sense that it relates to science. It's probably best suited for presentation in philosophy of science classes for its critique of the limitations of science

That is NOT the claim they make. They claim it is science. They want it taught in science class as science. But it just ain't.

fiveeagles

Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver

Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 6:55 am Post subject:

mindmetoo wrote:

Maybe, it's because we live in a biased society that prevents truth from entering the Academy. Imagine, if you can, what is at stake if the evolution camp loses here. Our society is based upon an evolutionary view and many people are very happy to see that continue. Every year, Geologists are made famous with every missing link they supposedly discover. University grants and research articles are based upon the search for evolutionary explanations. The medical field needs evolution to continue since its in the business of keeping people sick. Pharmaceuticals racking in their millions while they encourage the public to believe in that next miracle drug.

Imagine if a team of researchers established that God's healing is available for today and that this is the great hope for the future. That one day, we won't need drugs or pharmaceuticals.

I remember reading an article a year ago in Wired magazine where a distinguished paper published an article on ID and then the writer was slammed and lost all respect and titles. To stand for the ID theory means you have to do it at the risk of being on the outside of the establishment. You don't get the fame, the dollars and the women. A big price to pay.

I think you posted an article from Rolllingstone. What a bunch of shyte. Even if it isn't from the Rollingstone, it's eerily reminiscient of the hypocritical tripe of their preadolecent whinings. The article in the rollingstones attacked the ID members because of their clothing style. Ummm, where does Rollingstone get off by jacking on the ID guys? I mean, look at their front men and the ones that they revere?

Regardless, I think you make a good point about the judge and his ruling. First off, it should give you hope in the judicial system and how it rules beyond the rule of Bush. It should make you appreciative that a judicial appointee isn't a guarantee of partisan politics. Reagan's appointees have already shown this to be true.

That being said, I think that this judge missed the deeper issues at hand here. I personally don't know the school board trustees, so i don't know why the accusations were made and then nothing came out of it? Perjury? Not understanding the natural bias in the evolution camp and how society has evolved to conform to this paradygm.

So finally, I guess it comes down to your insecurities...reallly. Why must you attack my intelligence or others who don't believe in your illusions? Come out of the fear MM2 and you will begin to see how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Page 7 of 7

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe