U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-09-2008, 08:08 PM
 
Location: NYC
190 posts, read 815,764 times
Reputation: 51

Advertisements

And God said "Let the Land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

-Gen 1:24-25

 
Old 10-09-2008, 08:45 PM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
789 posts, read 1,159,294 times
Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikk View Post
That's the same word for breathing flesh. What do you care about the bible. You have rejected God and only accept a naturalistic explanation for the world around you.

You want me to give you verse from the bible. So, I do, then you reject them. Then you ask me to explain the world based on the bible and I do. And you reject my explanation saying I didn't use scriptures. Now you keep bringing up scriptures, but don't even look at them. I think you are hoping to find a loop hole. But a loop hole in something you don't believe?
Flesh is also used to describe fruit. The only reference I can find using "Nephesh Choyah" on Google is this thread.

This is what I found looking for a translation:
Quote:
living substance
yquwm (yek-oom')
standing (extant), i.e. by implication, a living thing -- (living) substance.
So the Bible is wrong and you are right?

I don't care about the Bible. I know it is fiction. However, I know that you think it is true so I'm going to go with it for the sake of the argument. Every different translation I can find of Genesis 7:4 says the same thing, either "living substance" or "living thing".

Can you give me a link that explains that "living substance" really means breathing flesh and if it means breathing flesh, how can we be sure it isn't talking about fruit as well?
 
Old 10-10-2008, 04:43 AM
 
Location: PA
2,616 posts, read 3,885,107 times
Reputation: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by fancofu View Post
Flesh is also used to describe fruit. The only reference I can find using "Nephesh Choyah" on Google is this thread.

This is what I found looking for a translation:

So the Bible is wrong and you are right?

I don't care about the Bible. I know it is fiction. However, I know that you think it is true so I'm going to go with it for the sake of the argument. Every different translation I can find of Genesis 7:4 says the same thing, either "living substance" or "living thing".

Can you give me a link that explains that "living substance" really means breathing flesh and if it means breathing flesh, how can we be sure it isn't talking about fruit as well?
That is Nephesh Chayah, or Nephesh Chayim. Sorry for the misspelling.

See: here
 
Old 10-10-2008, 05:40 AM
 
428 posts, read 1,476,826 times
Reputation: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reformed Liberal View Post
Man! You are absolutely right. I cannot stand those Christian suicide bombers. I mean Jesus preaching love and all that, just a mess.
Man! What fabulous platitudes!

I'm all for following Jesus' teachings of love and good will. That has ZERO to do with the dangers of teaching religion to children to the exclusion of scientific facts.

As to the point, you aren't getting it. I didn't say Christians are becoming suicide bombers, did I. In the context of teaching our kids religion instead of science and basically dissing science as "another religion", we are guilty of promoting exactly what the radical Islamists are already doing exclusively--teaching their kids only religion and nothing else. Such an eventuality won't lead to suicide bombers because fundamentalist Christians have a different misinterpretation of their Holy Book than Muslims do of theirs. But it will lead to ignorance and a reversal of the purpose of the Founding Fathers of this country (did you know Jefferson was an amateur paleontologist?), who designed the constitution expressly to prevent the establishment of a national religion.
 
Old 10-10-2008, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 10,942,321 times
Reputation: 3716
Default Quotes of the Day

[quote=Mozart271;5624155] Arguing with a Creationist using fact and logic is as pointless as... (etc.)

It is a shame we have such a prominent anti-intellectual movement in this country that we have half the population believing in a crock of sh*t and denying science as "another religion". [quote]

Exactly. good observation,and additionally I re-quote...

"Prosletyzing without reason is lying"

Or, as Arty Shaw might have said (as the sage guru on Laugh-In):

"He who bangs his head against the wall of logic and sees not blood, but instead the image of The Virgin Mary, complete with tears, should go immediately to his neurologist, not his priest."

Well, it's more like my creative quote, but you get the idea.

PS: There were no takers on my post-challenge to debate logic systems instead of religion/evolution. Imagine that!

"Get back to work, rifleman!"
(my boss...)
 
Old 10-10-2008, 11:05 AM
 
Location: PA
2,616 posts, read 3,885,107 times
Reputation: 465
Here are some good quotes. riffleman, the first one is for you.

"At this point, it is necessary to reveal a little inside information about how scientists work, something the textbooks don't usually tell you. The fact is that scientists are not really as objective and dispassionate in their work as they would like you to think. Most scientists first get their ideas about how the world works not through rigorously logical processes but through hunches and wild guesses. As individuals they often come to believe something to be true long before they assemble the hard evidence that will convince somebody else that it is. Motivated by faith in his own ideas and a desire for acceptance by his peers, a scientist will labor for years knowing in his heart that his theory is correct but devising experiment after experiment whose results he hopes will support his position." - Boyce Rensberger

‘Biologists would dearly like to know how modern apes, modern humans and the various ancestral hominids have evolved from a common ancestor. Unfortunately, the fossil record is somewhat incomplete as far as the hominids are concerned, and it is all but blank for the apes. The best we can hope for is that more fossils will be found over the next few years which will fill the present gaps in the evidence.’ The author goes on to say: ‘David Pilbeam [a well-known expert in human evolution] comments wryly, “If you brought in a smart scientist from another discipline and showed him the meagre evidence we’ve got he'd surely say, ‘forget it: there isn’t enough to go on’.” - Richard E. Leakey

This one is my favorite:

‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.’ - Richard Lewontin
 
Old 10-10-2008, 12:16 PM
 
Location: PA
2,616 posts, read 3,885,107 times
Reputation: 465
Here's another quote:

‘Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint—and Mr [sic] Gish is but one of many to make it—the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.’ - Michael Ruse
 
Old 10-10-2008, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
29,711 posts, read 30,238,530 times
Reputation: 12063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikk View Post
Here's another quote:

‘Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint—and Mr [sic] Gish is but one of many to make it—the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.’ - Michael Ruse
Ahh, quote mining. That is so quaint, but unfortunately Michael Ruse is full of hot air.
 
Old 10-10-2008, 03:07 PM
 
Location: in my house
1,385 posts, read 2,657,159 times
Reputation: 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikk View Post
Here's another quote:

‘Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint—and Mr [sic] Gish is but one of many to make it—the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.’ - Michael Ruse
What christian biased site did you pull that from?
 
Old 10-10-2008, 03:48 PM
 
428 posts, read 1,476,826 times
Reputation: 282
Pulling quotes from here and there is a favorite trick of people who post on these forums from the basis of ignorance of real facts, I notice. These quotes are always totally out of context and/or meaningless as far as "proving" anything at all. That annoying proclivity usually goes hand in hand with demanding examples from opponents, only to diss any provided examples as false.

It's futile to try to argue with someone whose mind is closed. Unfortunately religion has a tendency to set the cement.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top