Creation vs. Evolution Debate

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Creation vs. Evolution Debate

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 5 of 30 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

tome Inner Tantalus Time. 07 Jan 05 10.46am
I am not religious, and find the idea of a God or many Gods extremely difficult to rationalise with the wider world. The fact that violence, war and natural disaster seem to occur apparently indiscriminately and the fact that they occur at all would seem to indicate the lack of a divine being. I do, however, believe that humans can be capable of a generalised spirituality, which does not have to relate to any particular belief system, but has been channeled this way in an attempt to understand it. I think religion itself has a lot to answer for, in terms of the way in which it divides people and groups of people, which has led to all manner of strife and angst. Just look at Israel and Palestine. I also hold that religion implicitly invokes a worrying lack of responsibility amongst believers. It can lead to the idea that everything is fated and the will of God, statements which can be used to absolve people of responsibility for their lives and their actions, which is a bad thing to encourage, especially early on, as jcreedy mentioned about children. A one and a two...
Alert a moderator to this post

tome

Inner Tantalus Time. 07 Jan 05 10.46am

I am not religious, and find the idea of a God or many Gods extremely difficult to rationalise with the wider world. The fact that violence, war and natural disaster seem to occur apparently indiscriminately and the fact that they occur at all would seem to indicate the lack of a divine being.

I do, however, believe that humans can be capable of a generalised spirituality, which does not have to relate to any particular belief system, but has been channeled this way in an attempt to understand it.

I think religion itself has a lot to answer for, in terms of the way in which it divides people and groups of people, which has led to all manner of strife and angst. Just look at Israel and Palestine.

I also hold that religion implicitly invokes a worrying lack of responsibility amongst believers. It can lead to the idea that everything is fated and the will of God, statements which can be used to absolve people of responsibility for their lives and their actions, which is a bad thing to encourage, especially early on, as jcreedy mentioned about children.

A one and a two...

Alert a moderator to this post

mattwebb Sutton 07 Jan 05 12.09pm
Quote Moose at 07 Jan 2005 9:30am 1. I'm a regular church-going Christian. 2. However, I don't believe in the creation, the immaculate conception or the resurrection. 3. I don't even believe that Jesus was divine, but I believe that he was an immensely important person who altered people's views on how to live. As a follower of his doctrine I call myself a Christian and I go to Church. 4. I do believe in God, but not as in an old bloke with a long white beard armed with thunderbolts. It's difficult to explain but it's more like God is every one of us, in our souls and consciences - that "little voice" behind our daily lives. And no, I don't hear people telling me to eat children! It's OK, it's nearly time for my medication... One who does not believe in the divinity of Christ or the resurrection of Christ is not a Christian. You can call yourself whatever you want but you are not a real true Christian. Am I really a Muslim if I don't believe the Koran, or that Mohammed was a prophet or that Allah is God, but believe there is a God. That doesn't make me anymore Muslim than you are Christian. A person can only be a Christian if they believe that Christ was God, believes in the trinity, and believes that Christ, the Son of God, died and rose again as a substitutional sacrifice for mankind. You can tell me that dictionary.com says that a Christian is just a follower of Christ, and although you don't believe His deity, you follow what He wrote. Well that's rubbish, what authority does dictionary.com have in defining what a real Christian is and believes? I'd rather read the Bible. I'm not getting into this debate, I just wanted to point out that it is daft to call yourself a Christian when you don't believe Christianity. I know some people might think that you can call yourself whatever you want, and why use the Bible. The thing is Christianity is from the Bible, so WE MOST DEFINATELY SHOULD use the Bible to define what a true Christian believes, not just some guy who calls himself a Christian.
Alert a moderator to this post

mattwebb

Sutton 07 Jan 05 12.09pm

Quote Moose at 07 Jan 2005 9:30am

1. I'm a regular church-going Christian.
2. However, I don't believe in the creation, the immaculate conception or the resurrection.
3. I don't even believe that Jesus was divine, but I believe that he was an immensely important person who altered people's views on how to live. As a follower of his doctrine I call myself a Christian and I go to Church.
4. I do believe in God, but not as in an old bloke with a long white beard armed with thunderbolts. It's difficult to explain but it's more like God is every one of us, in our souls and consciences - that "little voice" behind our daily lives. And no, I don't hear people telling me to eat children!

It's OK, it's nearly time for my medication...

One who does not believe in the divinity of Christ or the resurrection of Christ is not a Christian.

You can call yourself whatever you want but you are not a real true Christian.

Am I really a Muslim if I don't believe the Koran, or that Mohammed was a prophet or that Allah is God, but believe there is a God.

That doesn't make me anymore Muslim than you are Christian.

A person can only be a Christian if they believe that Christ was God, believes in the trinity, and believes that Christ, the Son of God, died and rose again as a substitutional sacrifice for mankind.

You can tell me that dictionary.com says that a Christian is just a follower of Christ, and although you don't believe His deity, you follow what He wrote.

Well that's rubbish, what authority does dictionary.com have in defining what a real Christian is and believes? I'd rather read the Bible.

I'm not getting into this debate, I just wanted to point out that it is daft to call yourself a Christian when you don't believe Christianity.

I know some people might think that you can call yourself whatever you want, and why use the Bible. The thing is Christianity is from the Bible, so WE MOST DEFINATELY SHOULD use the Bible to define what a true Christian believes, not just some guy who calls himself a Christian.

Alert a moderator to this post

Moose In the sewer pipe... 07 Jan 05 12.20pm
Quote mattwebb at 07 Jan 2005 12:09pm One who does not believe in the divinity of Christ or the resurrection of Christ is not a Christian. You can call yourself whatever you want but you are not a real true Christian. Am I really a Muslim if I don't believe the Koran, or that Mohammed was a prophet or that Allah is God, but believe there is a God. That doesn't make me anymore Muslim than you are Christian. A person can only be a Christian if they believe that Christ was God, believes in the trinity, and believes that Christ, the Son of God, died and rose again as a substitutional sacrifice for mankind. You can tell me that dictionary.com says that a Christian is just a follower of Christ, and although you don't believe His deity, you follow what He wrote. Well that's rubbish, what authority does dictionary.com have in defining what a real Christian is and believes? I'd rather read the Bible. I'm not getting into this debate, I just wanted to point out that it is daft to call yourself a Christian when you don't believe Christianity. I know some people might think that you can call yourself whatever you want, and why use the Bible. The thing is Christianity is from the Bible, so WE MOST DEFINATELY SHOULD use the Bible to define what a true Christian believes, not just some guy who calls himself a Christian. What a pompous, overbearing load of crap. It's bigoted people like you that give organised religion a bad name and are partly to blame for the huge decline in church attendance in this country. How on earth can you say that a person cannot be a Christian if they are uncertain of the resurrection? There are many Christian scholars - and clergy in fact - who are more sagacious than you and who have a problem with the resurrection - are they not Christians either? Edited by Moose (07 Jan 2005 12:29pm) Goodness is what you do. Not who you pray to.
Alert a moderator to this post

Moose

In the sewer pipe... 07 Jan 05 12.20pm

Quote mattwebb at 07 Jan 2005 12:09pm

One who does not believe in the divinity of Christ or the resurrection of Christ is not a Christian.

You can call yourself whatever you want but you are not a real true Christian.

Am I really a Muslim if I don't believe the Koran, or that Mohammed was a prophet or that Allah is God, but believe there is a God.

That doesn't make me anymore Muslim than you are Christian.

A person can only be a Christian if they believe that Christ was God, believes in the trinity, and believes that Christ, the Son of God, died and rose again as a substitutional sacrifice for mankind.

You can tell me that dictionary.com says that a Christian is just a follower of Christ, and although you don't believe His deity, you follow what He wrote.

Well that's rubbish, what authority does dictionary.com have in defining what a real Christian is and believes? I'd rather read the Bible.

I'm not getting into this debate, I just wanted to point out that it is daft to call yourself a Christian when you don't believe Christianity.

What a pompous, overbearing load of crap. It's bigoted people like you that give organised religion a bad name and are partly to blame for the huge decline in church attendance in this country.

How on earth can you say that a person cannot be a Christian if they are uncertain of the resurrection? There are many Christian scholars - and clergy in fact - who are more sagacious than you and who have a problem with the resurrection - are they not Christians either?

Edited by Moose (07 Jan 2005 12:29pm)

Goodness is what you do. Not who you pray to.

Alert a moderator to this post

jcreedy 07 Jan 05 12.23pm
mattwebb, your post demonstrates one of the main reason why I detest religion. Christians can't even agree between themselves what they should be believeing in. It was my dream to play for Palace and to make my debut. I've always played for the club so if I'm playing here, I wouldn't want to be anywhere else. - John Bostock (Nov 2007)
Alert a moderator to this post

jcreedy

07 Jan 05 12.23pm

mattwebb, your post demonstrates one of the main reason why I detest religion. Christians can't even agree between themselves what they should be believeing in.

It was my dream to play for Palace and to make my debut. I've always played for the club so if I'm playing here, I wouldn't want to be anywhere else.

- John Bostock (Nov 2007)

Alert a moderator to this post

tetley Wimbledon 07 Jan 05 12.25pm
Quote mattwebb at 07 Jan 2005 12:09pm what authority does dictionary.com have in defining what a real Christian is and believes? I'd rather read the Bible. I know some people might think that you can call yourself whatever you want, and why use the Bible. The thing is Christianity is from the Bible, so WE MOST DEFINATELY SHOULD use the Bible to define what a true Christian believes, not just some guy who calls himself a Christian. mattweb, i find your argument that one cannot define themselves as a christian on their own terms hard to swallow. the meaning of language is never fixed, the meaning is always transistory and open to interpetration. whilst you may have one concept of the word christian and its implications, it is perfectly acceptable for someone else to have another. it is like asking something to define the word 'fair' or 'reasonable'. millions of people will define it differently and there is nothing unacceptable with that. as for your dependnce on the bible as the source of all knowledge, consider the amount of times the oral word has been translated again and again, by various tongues of different nations until it has become laid down as the modern transcription we find today. the original aramaic or hebrew would have been translated into ancient reek, then most likely into latin, and then to old english before it became the english of today. considering the various nuances in the languages, not to mention words and phrases that are often simply untranslatable, you should be perhaps more wary of taking the bible as 'gospel'. various theologians will even eagerly point out to you that it is most likely in the original text that jesus never even pronounced himself to be the son of god. i don't think you should carry out your threat to abort the debate though. it is very important that both sides should be argued. It's not the fall that's important.....it's the landing All Nature is but Art, unknown to thee; All Chance, Direction, which thou canst not see; All Discord, Harmony, not understood; All partial Evil, universal Good [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

tetley

Wimbledon 07 Jan 05 12.25pm

Quote mattwebb at 07 Jan 2005 12:09pm

what authority does dictionary.com have in defining what a real Christian is and believes? I'd rather read the Bible.

mattweb, i find your argument that one cannot define themselves as a christian on their own terms hard to swallow. the meaning of language is never fixed, the meaning is always transistory and open to interpetration. whilst you may have one concept of the word christian and its implications, it is perfectly acceptable for someone else to have another. it is like asking something to define the word 'fair' or 'reasonable'. millions of people will define it differently and there is nothing unacceptable with that.

as for your dependnce on the bible as the source of all knowledge, consider the amount of times the oral word has been translated again and again, by various tongues of different nations until it has become laid down as the modern transcription we find today. the original aramaic or hebrew would have been translated into ancient reek, then most likely into latin, and then to old english before it became the english of today.

considering the various nuances in the languages, not to mention words and phrases that are often simply untranslatable, you should be perhaps more wary of taking the bible as 'gospel'. various theologians will even eagerly point out to you that it is most likely in the original text that jesus never even pronounced himself to be the son of god.

i don't think you should carry out your threat to abort the debate though. it is very important that both sides should be argued.

It's not the fall that's important.....it's the landing
All Nature is but Art, unknown to thee;
All Chance, Direction, which thou canst not see;
All Discord, Harmony, not understood;
All partial Evil, universal Good

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

mattwebb Sutton 07 Jan 05 12.39pm
No they most certainly are not Christians if they don't believe that Jesus is God. Why is that pompous, calling yourself a Christian is like calling yourself a Palace fan if you don't like Palace. It is an oxymoron. I am not going to get into this row, but I think it is vital to not deceive others who may come to Christ, into believing they are already Christians if they don't believe. Sure we all have doubts, but you wrote down with no mistake that you don't believe in the divinity of Christ. I believe that is verging on blasphemy. I don't like to preach, but when I saw your nonsense post, I felt it was very important to let the readers of it know that you are not really a Christian until you believe in CHRISTIANITY! HELLO ISN'T THIS OBVIOUS!? I can't believe you are even arguing with me! There is a difference between religious scholar and Christian, and just because one is a member of clergy does not mean anything. The clergy is one of the most corrupt things in the world. I'll stick to where we know all about Christianity from, the Bible. I am sure there are some great Christians within the clergy, but there are definately some loonies in there too.
Alert a moderator to this post

mattwebb

Sutton 07 Jan 05 12.39pm

No they most certainly are not Christians if they don't believe that Jesus is God.

Why is that pompous, calling yourself a Christian is like calling yourself a Palace fan if you don't like Palace.

It is an oxymoron.

I am not going to get into this row, but I think it is vital to not deceive others who may come to Christ, into believing they are already Christians if they don't believe.

Sure we all have doubts, but you wrote down with no mistake that you don't believe in the divinity of Christ. I believe that is verging on blasphemy.

I don't like to preach, but when I saw your nonsense post, I felt it was very important to let the readers of it know that you are not really a Christian until you believe in CHRISTIANITY!

HELLO ISN'T THIS OBVIOUS!?

I can't believe you are even arguing with me! There is a difference between religious scholar and Christian, and just because one is a member of clergy does not mean anything.

The clergy is one of the most corrupt things in the world. I'll stick to where we know all about Christianity from, the Bible.

I am sure there are some great Christians within the clergy, but there are definately some loonies in there too.

Alert a moderator to this post

yellabubs Sheffield 07 Jan 05 12.42pm
Tetley is right. The bible was originally written in a form of Hebrew and will contain no definition of the English word "Christianity".
Alert a moderator to this post

yellabubs

Sheffield 07 Jan 05 12.42pm

Tetley is right. The bible was originally written in a form of Hebrew and will contain no definition of the English word "Christianity".

Alert a moderator to this post

mattwebb Sutton 07 Jan 05 12.42pm
Hello tetley thank you for your kind hearted words. i don't agree with your belief that the Bible may have been corrupted because the more evidence of ancient scriptures we find the more we find that the Greek today has changed at all. The thing is that Christianity does originate with the Bible, so the definition of "Christian" surely should be based on what the Bible says about being a Christian. Fair, reasonable and Christian are not similar words though are they. A Christian is a spiritual thing, and one cannot just claim to be a Christian when they are not. It is unfair to take this label and cheapen it.
Alert a moderator to this post

mattwebb

Sutton 07 Jan 05 12.42pm

Hello tetley thank you for your kind hearted words. i don't agree with your belief that the Bible may have been corrupted because the more evidence of ancient scriptures we find the more we find that the Greek today has changed at all.

The thing is that Christianity does originate with the Bible, so the definition of "Christian" surely should be based on what the Bible says about being a Christian.

Fair, reasonable and Christian are not similar words though are they.

A Christian is a spiritual thing, and one cannot just claim to be a Christian when they are not.

It is unfair to take this label and cheapen it.

Alert a moderator to this post

al81 finchley 07 Jan 05 12.43pm
Quote rach_d_cpfc at 07 Jan 2005 12:06am Quote A_JsShorts at 07 Jan 2005 12:02am It to me is a great book but totally unsubstanciated with the knowledge and proof that we have nowadays to do with the big bang and evolution. Science does not claim to have proved the big bang. Science has theories, religions have faith. Not completely true - I've done two years of work in a lab at Cancer Research UK, and maaaan, you've gotta have a lot of blind faith to believe in some of these theories, when nothing you do works out. The basis for both science and 'sensible' religion is really very similar - common sense and a leap of faith. And yes I do believe in God, and science...and evolution is only a theory.
Alert a moderator to this post

al81

finchley 07 Jan 05 12.43pm

Quote rach_d_cpfc at 07 Jan 2005 12:06am

Quote A_JsShorts at 07 Jan 2005 12:02am
It to me is a great book but totally unsubstanciated with the knowledge and proof that we have nowadays to do with the big bang and evolution.

Science does not claim to have proved the big bang. Science has theories, religions have faith.

Not completely true - I've done two years of work in a lab at Cancer Research UK, and maaaan, you've gotta have a lot of blind faith to believe in some of these theories, when nothing you do works out. The basis for both science and 'sensible' religion is really very similar - common sense and a leap of faith.

And yes I do believe in God, and science...and evolution is only a theory.

Alert a moderator to this post

tetley Wimbledon 07 Jan 05 12.46pm
Quote mattwebb at 07 Jan 2005 12:39pm you are not really a Christian until you believe in CHRISTIANITY! I'll stick to where we know all about Christianity from, the Bible. but christianity is completely open to interpreation. there is not one fixed way to interret the bible. therefore, whatever way someone interprets christianity ultimately leads them to define themselves as a christian ased on the same set of principles. to use your example, if someone reads the history of crystal palace and deduces that to be a fan you must boo the team, then they will boo the team and believe themselves to be a fan. and I'd be interested to hear your responses to my earlier comments on the bible. - (edit)oh you have now, i'll read them and come back to you. furthermore, you may like to calm down and respect the opinions of others more. - again (edit), you have so apologies! Edited by tetley (07 Jan 2005 12:47pm) It's not the fall that's important.....it's the landing All Nature is but Art, unknown to thee; All Chance, Direction, which thou canst not see; All Discord, Harmony, not understood; All partial Evil, universal Good [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

tetley

Wimbledon 07 Jan 05 12.46pm

Quote mattwebb at 07 Jan 2005 12:39pm

you are not really a Christian until you believe in CHRISTIANITY!

I'll stick to where we know all about Christianity from, the Bible.

but christianity is completely open to interpreation. there is not one fixed way to interret the bible. therefore, whatever way someone interprets christianity ultimately leads them to define themselves as a christian ased on the same set of principles. to use your example, if someone reads the history of crystal palace and deduces that to be a fan you must boo the team, then they will boo the team and believe themselves to be a fan.

and I'd be interested to hear your responses to my earlier comments on the bible. - (edit)oh you have now, i'll read them and come back to you.

furthermore, you may like to calm down and respect the opinions of others more. - again (edit), you have so apologies!

Edited by tetley (07 Jan 2005 12:47pm)

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

mattwebb Sutton 07 Jan 05 12.46pm
The Bible was not only written in Hebrew, but in Amaraic and Greek too. The original texts only lose meaning when translated to English because there are Greek and Hebrew words that have no equivalent in the English language. Agape for example is a greek word with no English translation. It means "the love God has for his children, which is unconditional and not based on performance". Find one English word that means that, "grace" is about as close to it as we can get, but so much is lost. But if like I, you have studied the original texts then you know exactly what the Bible is trying to say to us. The Bible is a lot less effective in it's English form
Alert a moderator to this post

mattwebb

Sutton 07 Jan 05 12.46pm

The Bible was not only written in Hebrew, but in Amaraic and Greek too.

The original texts only lose meaning when translated to English because there are Greek and Hebrew words that have no equivalent in the English language.

Agape for example is a greek word with no English translation. It means "the love God has for his children, which is unconditional and not based on performance". Find one English word that means that, "grace" is about as close to it as we can get, but so much is lost.

But if like I, you have studied the original texts then you know exactly what the Bible is trying to say to us.

The Bible is a lot less effective in it's English form

Alert a moderator to this post

al81 finchley 07 Jan 05 12.49pm
Quote mattwebb at 07 Jan 2005 12:39pm No they most certainly are not Christians if they don't believe that Jesus is God. Why is that pompous, calling yourself a Christian is like calling yourself a Palace fan if you don't like Palace. It is an oxymoron. I am not going to get into this row, but I think it is vital to not deceive others who may come to Christ, into believing they are already Christians if they don't believe. Sure we all have doubts, but you wrote down with no mistake that you don't believe in the divinity of Christ. I believe that is verging on blasphemy. I don't like to preach, but when I saw your nonsense post, I felt it was very important to let the readers of it know that you are not really a Christian until you believe in CHRISTIANITY! HELLO ISN'T THIS OBVIOUS!? I can't believe you are even arguing with me! There is a difference between religious scholar and Christian, and just because one is a member of clergy does not mean anything. The clergy is one of the most corrupt things in the world. I'll stick to where we know all about Christianity from, the Bible. I am sure there are some great Christians within the clergy, but there are definately some loonies in there too. Kind of get what you're saying. the trouble is when people think of themselves as ethnically Christian, as you can be a Jewish atheist cos its all about birthright (very weird), while with Muslims its all about belief and nothing to do with ethnicity. Christianity falls somewhere in between I think - true believers hate the idea that a 'nonbeliever' can call themselves a Christian (just like we would be pist off if kaviedes-freak tried to call himself a Palce fan -haha!), but people in the middle like to call themselves Christian as that's what their family have always been (at least for about 2000 years) and to them it doesn't matter that much how much they believe in it all.
Alert a moderator to this post

al81

finchley 07 Jan 05 12.49pm

Quote mattwebb at 07 Jan 2005 12:39pm

No they most certainly are not Christians if they don't believe that Jesus is God.

Why is that pompous, calling yourself a Christian is like calling yourself a Palace fan if you don't like Palace.

It is an oxymoron.

I am not going to get into this row, but I think it is vital to not deceive others who may come to Christ, into believing they are already Christians if they don't believe.

Sure we all have doubts, but you wrote down with no mistake that you don't believe in the divinity of Christ. I believe that is verging on blasphemy.

I don't like to preach, but when I saw your nonsense post, I felt it was very important to let the readers of it know that you are not really a Christian until you believe in CHRISTIANITY!

HELLO ISN'T THIS OBVIOUS!?

I can't believe you are even arguing with me! There is a difference between religious scholar and Christian, and just because one is a member of clergy does not mean anything.

The clergy is one of the most corrupt things in the world. I'll stick to where we know all about Christianity from, the Bible.

I am sure there are some great Christians within the clergy, but there are definately some loonies in there too.

Kind of get what you're saying. the trouble is when people think of themselves as ethnically Christian, as you can be a Jewish atheist cos its all about birthright (very weird), while with Muslims its all about belief and nothing to do with ethnicity.

Christianity falls somewhere in between I think - true believers hate the idea that a 'nonbeliever' can call themselves a Christian (just like we would be pist off if kaviedes-freak tried to call himself a Palce fan -haha!), but people in the middle like to call themselves Christian as that's what their family have always been (at least for about 2000 years) and to them it doesn't matter that much how much they believe in it all.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 5 of 30 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Creation vs. Evolution Debate

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors