Is It Possible............Is It Safe..........

[burgyeb]

Einstein did not believe in God. he had a problem with the fact that everything started in one place and considered that this could have pointed to a creator. But he added a constant, wrongly to make up for that. He would not have done that if he had any nagging doubts that there may have been a creator.

As for scientific support for God, I have not seen anything that is peer reviewed. Belief in Jesus is another matter. I believe that a person called Jesus existed, but he was simply a man and not the son of a god. If we are to believe in Jesus as the son of god then why not Mohammed, Haile Selassie or David Icke.

I can accept your above stated comment relating to what "you believe about Jesus", as your personal belief set.

Found a few peer review sites concerning professional journal reviews on topics including God's existence, creationism, etc. See links below:

http://creation.com/professional-pee...ntific-journal

http://creation.com/

http://creation.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter1.pdf

[kreativebargains]

I can accept your above stated comment relating to what "you believe about Jesus", as your personal belief set.

Found a few peer review sites concerning professional journal reviews on topics including God's existence, creationism, etc. See links below:

http://creation.com/professional-pee...ntific-journal

http://creation.com/

http://creation.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter1.pdf

The first two are from the same site and they even state themselves that "That’s why creationists set up their own scientific journals—to break free from these mind-forged manacles". That is pretty much like the NRA publishing and peer reviewing articles that claim guns don't kill. As for the third link I read quite a bit of it but believed none of it, so god exists because the bible says so. As for the statistics linking the decline in society linked with the abandonment of the church, statistics could probably be found to link numerous other things in a similar manner. Statistically there is more chance that you would die before your 30th birthday in Victorian times when Christian morality was higher. Does that mean that the bible was to blame for early deaths in those times?

The simple fact is that from Genesis onward the bible is wrong. God did not create the Earth, the heaven and the stars, he did not create man and everything that walks and crawls and these major facts are wrong for one reason, there is no God.

[burgyeb]

The simple fact is that from Genesis onward the bible is wrong. God did not create the Earth, the heaven and the stars, he did not create man and everything that walks and crawls and these major facts are wrong for one reason, there is no God.

This is not a fact, it is your personal belief set as an atheist, as you do not believe in the Bible or God. You are entitled to your belief set, but it does not define fact for those who hold differing belief sets.

[kreativebargains]

This is not a fact, it is your personal belief set as an atheist, as you do not believe in the Bible or God. You are entitled to your belief set, but it does not define fact for those who hold differing belief sets.

I would still say that it is a fact that God did not create the Earth and stars. We now know how stars and planets are created. In addition the evidence is there that the Earth is around 4.5 billion years old not 6,000. Add in the knowledge that we now have for how life has evolved on Earth and major sections of the bible are discredited. If these biblical assertions are incorrect, which they are then the whole story collapses. I have no problem with people having their beliefs. Mine are not beliefs they are a response to proven facts.

[squern]

If you take the Bible as literal fact, you ignore the idea that it was written long after the events described in it, by people who were not born when they the events were supposed to have happened. You also lose the poetry, the symbolism, and the sense of analogy.

If you place the start of organised religion in the West at about 1100 AD, you have to consider the feudal nature of society, and the almost universal ignorance at the time. People then could not have coped with the ideas that are common to us now about the origin of the world and the universe, for instance.

They would not have had even the vocabulary to be able to understand it. So it was presented in easy-to-understand images and concepts.
And it was presented by people who were keen on control, obedience and deference from those seen as their inferiors.

A thousand years later, those ideas don't ring true because we have accumulated so much knowledge in the meantime, and we no longer defer to authority in the same way. In the intervening millenium, we have learned to think and reason for ourselves.

None of this means, of course, that there is not some higher power; just that the Bible is a tool a thousand years out of date, if you regard it as a literal guide for life.

The question I would ask of a person of faith would be: "If the Bible had never been written, would there be a God?"

[burgyeb]

]If you take the Bible as literal fact, you ignore the idea that it was written long after the events described in it, by people who were not born when they the events were supposed to have happened. You also lose the poetry, the symbolism, and the sense of analogy.

[/B]If you place the start of organised religion in the West at about 1100 AD, you have to consider the feudal nature of society, and the almost universal ignorance at the time. People then could not have coped with the ideas that are common to us now about the origin of the world and the universe, for instance.

They would not have had even the vocabulary to be able to understand it. So it was presented in easy-to-understand images and concepts.
And it was presented by people who were keen on control, obedience and deference from those seen as their inferiors.

A thousand years later, those ideas don't ring true because we have accumulated so much knowledge in the meantime, and we no longer defer to authority in the same way. In the intervening millenium, we have learned to think and reason for ourselves.

None of this means, of course, that there is not some higher power; just that the Bible is a tool a thousand years out of date, if you regard it as a literal guide for life.

The question I would ask of a person of faith would be: "If the Bible had never been written, would there be a God?"

As a person of faith, who describes themselves as a Christian, I would anwer your question as Yes. I believe in a personal God, and I believe that the Bible is a true representation of God's Word. My belief set includes viewing God as eternal, existing always, from the very beginning.

The Apostle John wrote.........."In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." [John 1:1-3 NIV] According to the Bible, which I consider to be true, the Word existed from the beginning, long before the earth or the cosmos existed.

John appears to be describing the Word as a person. The Word was from the beginning; the Word existed beside God (was with God); and the Word was God. He (the Word) was called creator of all things. This would include the smallest particle or cell known to mankind.

God is depicted as creating the heavens and the earth in the beginning. The earth was without form, as the Spirit of God hovered above; God speaking all things into existence. [Genesis 1:1-3]

Now, if you do not believe in God, the Biblical account of creation, or the Bible; then none of this will be true according to your personal belief set. That is fine, believe what ever you want to believe. However, the above represents a portion of my personal belief set about God and the Bible. All I ask is that I be allowed to also believe as I choose to believe.

I doubt if anyone viewing or participating in this thread will be able to make someone else change their personal belief set. Hopefully it will increase understanding of other's views and beliefs; along with tolerance for views that may differ from our own.

[burgyeb]

The first two are from the same site and they even state themselves that "That’s why creationists set up their own scientific journals—to break free from these mind-forged manacles".

Many scientific journals establish themselves along specific topics. Found another site dealing with science and religion across various faiths.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relatio...lels_in_method

[victorfrank]

There are two types of men, those who are afraid to lose God, and those who are afraid that they might find Him…
--Blaise Pascal, philosopher and scientist

[burgyeb]

What an astute observation.

[youmeus]

There are two types of men, those who are afraid to lose God, and those who are afraid that they might find Him…
--Blaise Pascal, philosopher and scientist

So true, thanks for sharing.