Spiritual Healing

[poohcarrot]

Pooh... I'm talking about how it fits with Genesis.

Oh, and how would Evolutionists explain irreducable complexity? (Google it if you don't know what it is.)

You're right. Clearly a long time ago snakes could talk, but somehow they lost the ability. A clear case of evolution if ever I saw one.

And I'm not going to google "irreducable complexity" because I know it'll be complete nonsense. Can't we debate using simple vocab that everyone can understand?

[Jan Van Quirm]

Not a question of translation or even "irreducable complexity" - Genesis (and the next 4 books) weren't written at all. They're 100% oral tradition written down millennia after the 'stories' began and told and retold and embellished over and over until the Sumerians learned to code speech and had to work everything out for themselves from scratch... Then you get the mistranslations kicking in

Genesis actually gets evolution in more or less the right order around day 4 (I think) the bit with the waters and then the plants and animals anyway in the same way that you can say dragons were dinosaurs and flying dragons were pteradons, or trolls were neanderthals and Ice Giants were glaciers - they're story-telling devices based on interpreting natural phenomena in the first place. God/religion is just one way of explaining the inexplicable for people who have no ready-made wisdom/knowledge to fall back on and really need someone to blame for dreaming up a 100,000 year long Ice Age

[captainmeme]

Meerkat,
The modern NIV and GNV are translated badly, but the KJV wasn't...
Pooh,
Irreducable Complexity is perfectly simple. It states that a certain part of an organism (taking the bacterial flagellum as an example) could not have evolved as it is made up of multiple parts which do not work if they are not together. The bacterial flagellum has about 6 parts which could not have been the result of a beneficial mutation because none of them are beneficial without the other 5, and all 6 could not have evolved at once, therefore any speicies with one of those parts would not have had an advantage over the other species and would have died out. Therefore, the bacterial flagellum could not have evolved.
Okay, perhaps that is a bit complicated. But it makes sense.

[Sjoerd3000]

Quick search on wiki shows some arguments against Irreducable Complexity

Some dude called Ken Miller talks about it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQQ7ubVIqo4

[Tonyblack]

Many years ago, when I was in school, I joined a Catholic Novitiate college because I thought, at the time, that I wanted to become a monk in a teaching order.

It actually had the effect of making me challenge all that I'd been taught about Christianity. One of the things we were taught by the Brotherhood was that: just because it's in the Bible, doesn't make it true. We were taught that a lot of the books, especially Genesis were written by men to try and explain the Creation. That didn't make it the word of God, but Man's interpretation of What God had done.

They also taught us to always question what we were taught and only to accept truth if it made sense to us as individuals.

I actually found the whole exercise very enlightening and questioned my faith and found it lacking. Science made much more sense than religion. And science had the advantage of being able to say: we don't know everything, but with time, effort and study we can learn.

Religion, on the other hand tends to say: All the answers are here, don't bother looking further.

That attitude has held mankind back over the years. It has meant that when people questioned their place in the Universe, they were told that it was wrong to do so - often on pain of death.

That's illogical to me. You get more answers when you ask questions than when you remain silent.

[Jan Van Quirm]

You get more answers when you ask questions than when you remain silent.

And from the answers, yet more questions arise and so God turns around and tells everyone "It's just 'because' OK - now shut up asking or I won't cook you your favourite nums-nums for supper!"

There is no science, just the art of asking more questions from the answers

[captainmeme]

I question all the time, but I've experienced God, which means I question from a different angle from you, I guess. I've questioned the Bible a lot, and I've got answers. I think the Bible is truth, and Genesis is literal: It was dictated from God to Moses, after all.

[Tonyblack]

But there you go - If you say that Genesis is literal and the Word of God dictated to Man, then you will never question it.

It doesn't matter that there is so much actual evidence that contradicts Genesis, to you it is always going to be beyond question.

As far as I'm concerned - whatever makes you happy is fine by me. I think you're wrong, but you have a right to believe what you believe.

[deldaisy]

Exactly Tony..

Thats why its called FAITH.

I grew up in a house with a dedicated atheist and a Catholic (not a church going one.... one who believed that God was there).

We really CAN just respect each others opinions and live side by side.

I personally don't go door to door telling people God is a huge myth and I would appreciate it if people wouldn't knock on MY door trying to convert me either. In fact... if it WAS me going door to door spruiking my atheist beliefs, I would most probably have the police asking me a few questions.

[meerkat]

That's what I don't like Del. I have my own version and it'll stay like that!
No one will ever talk me out of it.

[Tonyblack]

Meerkat,
The modern NIV and GNV are translated badly, but the KJV wasn't...
Pooh,
Irreducable Complexity is perfectly simple. It states that a certain part of an organism (taking the bacterial flagellum as an example) could not have evolved as it is made up of multiple parts which do not work if they are not together. The bacterial flagellum has about 6 parts which could not have been the result of a beneficial mutation because none of them are beneficial without the other 5, and all 6 could not have evolved at once, therefore any speicies with one of those parts would not have had an advantage over the other species and would have died out. Therefore, the bacterial flagellum could not have evolved.
Okay, perhaps that is a bit complicated. But it makes sense.

You are talking about Intelligent Design. There was a very interesting programme on the US TV channel PBS about it which you can see HERE.

Contrary to what the Intelligent Design people say, scientists have proved that flagellum did indeed evolve. The teaching of Intelligent Design in US schools went to court and was rejected.

[swreader]

I question all the time, but I've experienced God, which means I question from a different angle from you, I guess. I've questioned the Bible a lot, and I've got answers. I think the Bible is truth, and Genesis is literal: It was dictated from God to Moses, after all.

Capt--you need to read your King James bible more carefully. God does not dictate anything to Moses except the Ten Commandments (twice).

As to Genesis--if God dictated them, then he hiccuped because the account of the creation in Genesis Chapter 1 is totally different from Chapter 3. As my Bible as Lit prof said, "Clearly, the 1st Chapter was written much later as it's antiphonal. It was probably used as part of a service with the cantor singing all but the responses that follow each "day". The other story (in Chapter 3) bears considerable relationship to various other creation stories. She also commented that it is clear that there was a massive flood sometime in the past in the middle eastern region because accounts of such a flood appear in all (or almost all) of the religions of that region. But, as she said--whoever wrote the Noah story obviously knew nothing about boats, as the "arc" described there wouldn't have floated, let alone carried all the passengers described. The Phoenician account is much better, but then they were people who earned their livelihood by sailing.

[poohcarrot]

The thing is Capt, although I'm an atheist, you'll find that other members here are even more anti-religion than me. They are also far more eloquent, so you ain't gonna win any argument. In fact I'd say you were losing pretty badly so far, because your facts are totally wrong.

How can you believe the Bible to be 100% correct, then claim God dictated Genesis to Moses?

As a Pterry fan, I'd suggest you read Darwin's Watch.

[Jan Van Quirm]

The other story (in Chapter 3) bears considerable relationship to various other creation stories. She also commented that it is clear that there was a massive flood sometime in the past in the middle eastern region because accounts of such a flood appear in all (or almost all) of the religions of that region. But, as she said--whoever wrote the Noah story obviously knew nothing about boats, as the "arc" described there wouldn't have floated, let alone carried all the passengers described. The Phoenician account is much better, but then they were people who earned their livelihood by sailing.

If anyone here likes Robert Silverberg he wrote about the most cogent (if dramatised) interpretations of the religions and cultural creation myths of Sumer and Asia Minor in Gilgamesh the King (which is the earliest known work of fiction/myth as opposed to a writing of faith). The story he retells sheds light on amongst other things, Cain and Abel, Noah and the Flood, the secret of eternal life, burial customs of the god kings and their chattels and the secrets of temple 'goddess-whores' - fascinating stuff in high fantasy style and the journey of Gilgamesh to find a way to be a living god is utterly believable and ultimately extremely factual and overwhelmingly banal!

[btlfannz]

Feel the need to try to brainwash anyone into believing the particular load of tosh that you subscribe to? Then this is the place.

Tosh? Coswallop?, Utter nonesence? Try this. Homeopathy.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Bark flowers, drangon's ears, lemming warts, St Johns semen or badgers bile have any therapeutic efficacy at all.

The trace of whatever you want to put into distilled water is so negliable that it is inconceivable that it could do you an iota of good.

Literally thousands of independant, blind and double blind trials have been conducted by some of the worlds most eminant researchers all to reveal that not a single study shows homeopathic medicines have any value.
The best that you can claim fior them is the placebo effect. If you think it will do you some good, then for a lot of people it probably will.

Despite all that, about half the worlds population believes in it and are regular consumers. What a rort, what a scam.