Zone1 The Great Difficulty Of Being Religious.....

[PoliticalChic]

Thou Shalt Not Have Strange Gods

And your God allowed that to happen? Why didn't He keep the demons in Hell? Instead, He gave us Hell on Earth, according to your twisted text.

Revelation 20:7-10 The Message (MSG)When the thousand years are up, Satan will be let loose from his cell, and will launch again his old work of deceiving the nations, searching out victims in every nook and cranny of earth, even Gog and Magog!

 

[PoliticalChic]

All of Genesis is contradiction of modern science's facts.

Everything you say and claim to be true must be prefaced with an explanation on whether you're talking about 'literal truth' or 'allegorical' lessons in the bibles that have a meaning that requires an explanation.

Is Noah's ark a contradiction of reality?

It doesn't have to be, but you have to make the claim based on the above understanding we've reached on allegorical tales..

If you don't then some jerk will come along and try to drag the whole ark back to the 'literal truth' again.

"all of Genesis is contradiction of modern science's facts."


Amazing how ignorant you are.



scientist, Palmer, wrote a book about the astounding accuracy of the Bible, 3 thousand years ago, stating the order of the evolution of life on or planet….exactly the presentation that science now accepts as the fact.

Dr. Andrew Palmer, Oxford biologist, whose book, "The Genesis Enigma," states that the writer of the book of Genesis provides an uncannily similar synopsis of the events in the creation as compared to that accepted by modern science today.



Rather than ridicule the Bible, those very same secular, atheistic scientists have come around to accept the very order that the Old Testament claimed was the course of creation:
The idea of the miraculous confluence of the first chapter of Genesis and the sequence advanced by modern science is as follows:


a. The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.


b. From a water covered planet, to terrestrial life. The images in that writer’s mind of how our planet and life came to be must have seemed curious for the knowledge and experience of the time! Yet….he presented it as though it had been dictated to him, as though he had been spoken to by God.


c. If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, …then the seas appeared on earth, …and that life forms were photosynthetic.

d. Following that, he had to have realized that an eye evolved in an early animal in the geological past, which triggered the evolution of all the major groups of animals that exist today.

e. Still further, he must have felt that all of this occurred in the seas, before animals moved onto land, and only when they did move out of the water did mammals and birds evolve.

The above largely from chapter nine of zoologist Andrew Parker’s “The Genesis Enigma.”



Wow! What an incredibly lucky guess! What a considerable stroke of good fortune!

Or…an alternative explanation: divine intervention.

 

[PoliticalChic]

All of Genesis is contradiction of modern science's facts.

Everything you say and claim to be true must be prefaced with an explanation on whether you're talking about 'literal truth' or 'allegorical' lessons in the bibles that have a meaning that requires an explanation.

Is Noah's ark a contradiction of reality?

It doesn't have to be, but you have to make the claim based on the above understanding we've reached on allegorical tales..

If you don't then some jerk will come along and try to drag the whole ark back to the 'literal truth' again.

"all of Genesis is contradiction of modern science's facts."


Amazing how ignorant you are.


Genesis Correlates With Modern Science

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system.
2. The Sumarians believed that the earth lay at the center of the universe, and the ancient Israelites saw the stars as a heavenly sphere that enclosed everything.
3. The idea that th earth is round emerged some time after the Old Testament was written, when in the late sixth century BCE Pythagoras declared that the earth, along with the other planets, was spherical.
   1. In 287 BCE, Strato of Lampsacus’ school “advanced the theory that the sun was at rest at the center of the sphere of fixed stars, and that the earth and planets revolved around the sun.” Greek Astronomy
4. Then, in the 20th century, Einstein advanced his theory of general relativity, the implication of which was that the universe was not static- it must be expanding or contracting.

a. An understanding of the red shift pretty much established an expanding universe. With this came the realization that there must have been a beginning.

1. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain!
2. The basic forces of nature emerged- first gravity, then the strong force that holds the nuclei of atoms together (no atoms existed at this time), followed by weaker, then ‘electromagnetic’ forces. By the end of the firs second, there were quarks and electrons, nutrinos, some other stuff….and, later, some of them smashed together to form protons and neutrons.
3. So, there we have the idea of the universe suddenly appearing at a beginning, and all of that from a huge amount of energy. Of course, that doesn’t begin to ask the obvious: what existed before the Big Bang, and where did all that energy come from?
4. And, of course, the ancient Israelites behind the account of creation in Genesis, chapter 1, would have been oblivious to all the detailed described above. No idea about any ‘Big Bang.’
5. Probably anyone writing a creation account should have begun with the idea of the formation of the sun and the planets….shouldn’t they? Without the sun…how could Genesis refer to the ‘days’ of creation? So…“Let there be light” doesn’t really entail much….does it? It makes intuitive sense.
   1. Even the pagan world figured this out: most tended to worship the sun as the source of all life. But Genesis doesn’t speak of the sun…..only of light, until verses 14-19.
6. Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

 

[PoliticalChic]

All of Genesis is contradiction of modern science's facts.

Everything you say and claim to be true must be prefaced with an explanation on whether you're talking about 'literal truth' or 'allegorical' lessons in the bibles that have a meaning that requires an explanation.

Is Noah's ark a contradiction of reality?

It doesn't have to be, but you have to make the claim based on the above understanding we've reached on allegorical tales..

If you don't then some jerk will come along and try to drag the whole ark back to the 'literal truth' again.

Not done yet, Einstein wanted a model to explain the entire universe!
By 1917, he had devised a cosmological model based on what was known at the time by astronomers.

"[A cosmological constant was] the value of the energy density of the vacuum of space. It was originally introduced by Albert Einstein in 1917 as an addition to his theory of general relativity to "hold back gravity" and achieve a static universe, which was the accepted view at the time."
Cosmological constant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




At that time, Einstein had a view of a universe that was constant and static.

10. What changed is view?

The "red shift," and the idea of the Big Bang. Light is based on the electromagnetic field. It is due to the energy of the atoms, released as electrons move between orbits. Each atom has a unique spectral signature, a distinctive electromagnetic frequency. Therefore the light that comes to us from space reveals the composition of distant galaxies. It was found that the frequency of the hydrogen atoms of these galaxies was shifted to the red part of the spectrum.

In 1912, Vesto Slipher was the first to observe the shift of spectral lines of galaxies, making him the discoverer of galactic redshifts…. Edwin Hubble was generally incorrectly credited with discovering the redshift of galaxies.


a. Why?

For the same reason that the pitch of a police siren is changed as the police car disappears down the street: the Doppler Effect, the waves carrying the sound is stretched by the speeding car. That is why the red shift indicates that the galaxy in question is receding! The universe is expanding. Thus, the reasoning behind the Big Bang.
Berlinski, "The Devil's Delusion," ch.4



b. Get it? All the lines converge into…..the beginning! This presents a problem if one is tempted to believe in a universe with no beginning and no ending.
The Big Bang, therefore, suggests a universe that is finite in time. There was no time before the Big Bang.
Was there a time before the big bang? - Curiosity


Einstein got it.
"...when Einstein began to apply his theory to the structure of the universe, he was dismayed to find that it predicted either an expanding or contracting universe--something entirely incompatible with the prevailing notion of a static universe. In what he would later call "the greatest blunder of my life," ..."
Expanding Universe

 

[shockedcanadian]

In the face of the communist take-over of religious institutions.

1. It was a brilliant plan by the communists:
“Antonio Gramsci, the philosopher who became the iconic thinker of the 1960s, laid down the blueprint for precisely what has happened in Britain: the capture of all society's institutions, such as schools, universities, churches, the media, the legal profession, the police and voluntary groups. This intellectual elite was persuaded to sing from the same subversive hymn-sheet so that the moral beliefs of the majority would be replaced by the values of those on the margins of society, the perfect ambience in which the Muslim grievance culture could be fanned into the flames of extremism."
Melanie Phillips

2. "In 1907, a group of Methodists formed the Methodist Federation for Social Service (MFSS). The aim was to influence other Protestant groups. The next day, the group is received by President Theodore Roosevelt in the White House. One of the leaders, Harry F. Ward drafts a Social Creed that will be adopted by the 1908 General Conference and by the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America. Methodist Federation for Social Action

"The church, therefore, in the opinion of the federation, must accept
the Marxist point of viewThe federation, therefore, wants the religious leaders to preach a religious creed, not based upon the Bible and in defense of the American way of life, but one that is based upon the atheistic foundations of the philosophy of Marx. The federation wants the ministers to declare their judgment against the social economic system under which Americans live and prosper today in favor of the Socialist system, which in Russia and the satellite countries has brought the peoples." Read the ebook Investigation of Communist activities in the New York City area. Hearings (Volume pt. 5-6, pp. 1969-2143) by United States. Congress. House. Committee on Un-Am


3. And in trhe Catholic Church today...

"The Catholic turn to socialism is something to celebrate​

The turn to socialism must be seen as part of a general retrieval of the genuine political thought of the Catholic Church, against the misinterpretations of an older generation. The better part of a decade has now been spent identifying and correcting liberal corruptions of Catholic doctrine; once these have been dealt with, the socialist character of Catholic social teaching becomes clear.

By “socialism” I mean two things essentially: the rejection of the liberal, capitalist view of private property, and consequently the abolition of an economic order predicated on the exploitation of those who do not have property by those who do. Socialists desire a society of the common good, in which citizens collaborate for mutual advantage in enjoyment of peace and security; a society where the public authority is empowered to correct injuries to the common good, rather than standing by indifferently, as if it were powerless in the face of evil.
What a socialist means by the abolition of private property....."

The Catholic turn to socialism is something to celebrate - Catholic Herald

Why are so many younger Catholics drawn to socialism? Writing on this site, CC Pecknold recently suggested that "an increasingly vocal band of very online Catholics" is trying and failing "to reconcile socialist principles with (specifically Thomist) natural law principles". As one of these...

thecatholicherald.com

4. There is absolutely no basis for Socialism in the Bible.

An accurate understanding of the Bible requires the distinction between 'redistribution' and 'generosity.'
"Some people conclude from these verses that the Bible supports government-enforced wealth redistribution. But what these verses really show is that the Bible advocates generosity.

These are two very different concepts.
Generosity springs from free will....not force, coercion, or threats.
The motivation to give and share originates in compassion, as 1 John 3:17 indicates—but there is choice involved.
With socialism, it is the opposite.
Redistribution of wealth is always by force of government. The government simply uses its overwhelming power to take what it thinks is “fair” from the “givers.” Is God a Socialist?



5. Generosity is based on choice....on free will....the cornerstone of Judeo-Christian tradition.
Not so with any of these six: Socialism, Liberalism, Communism, Fascism, Nazism, or Progressivism.

As I have taught myself a great deal.about history (and so many other topics as my brain requires constant stimulation via reading or communicating) I have thought about this very subject. People of faith have a heavy burden to carry, many abandon this duty including Christians and Jews. Judaism in fact has the biggest burden in my opinion as G-d specifically stated the duties of faith, to be the role models if you will. All peaceful people of faith are persecuted be it Jews during WWII and in the Middle East, or Christians in the Middle East, Africa and the like. By the very nature of being peaceful, the violent non-believers, especially communists/fascists, will exploit the peaceful nature of believers. In my estimation, believer or not; the universe will have its.way with such souls. So many outcomes in nature suggests this. The Torah should be the guide of people of the Abrahamic faith in my.opinion, not man made inducements. Just the 613 Mitvah alone would dictate the just way in which we must live our lives, caring for one another in time of need, protecting justice (not evil violations) and the downtrodden.

 

[Trickster]

Which cardinal sin do you believe is good for our well-being?

All of them.

Lust is a good emotion. Sexual desire is not something to be ashamed of, it is a very pleasurable experience and it makes no sense for it to be wrong. In fact, repressing it is very bad for you.

Gluttony is good too -- enjoying a nice meal at a restaurant is awesome. Indulging in food brings pleasure.

Greed is not bad either. Desiring and consuming material goods is fun. It also offers a good motivation to work hard -- "man, I really want that iPhone. Better save some money." Career and ambition makes life fun.

Sloth seems bad on the surface, but understood in the Christian sense it is just laziness in regards to yiyr duty towards God.

Wrath is not bad either, anger is a reasonable emotion and it is even bad to not be angry if your values are attacked.

Envy in the Christian sense is just about desire making it not a bad thing either.

Pride Is the highest value. Trying to be perfect is an ideal to strive for.

Next, if someone laid down his/her life for you, wouldn't you regard that as valuable to you?

No, I think self-sacrifice is horrible.

 

[Trickster]

Would I be correct that you are a government school grad?


Ask me how I know that.

Is it fair to assume you were a victim of Sunday school?

 

[Trickster]

Interesting.
There is as much proof for the existence of God as there is for Darwin's Theory....but I bet you believe it.

This is factually incorrect.

 

[Trickster]

And the very same applies to Leftist ideology....Bolsheviks, Nazis, Maoists, Democrats, Progressives.


ll Leftist views begin with the fairy tale that they can change human nature.


b. Communist Revolution is based on the idea of transforming human nature. “The New Soviet man or New Soviet person (Russian: новый советский человек), as postulated by the ideologists of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, was an archetype of a person with certain qualities that were said to be emerging as dominant among all citizens of the Soviet Union, irrespective of the country's long-standing cultural, ethnic, and linguistic diversity, creating a single Soviet people, Soviet nation.<a href="New Soviet man - Wikipedia">[1]</a>

New Soviet man - Wikipedia​

en.wikipedia.org

Leon Trotsky wrote in his Literature and Revolution <a href="New Soviet man - Wikipedia">[2]</a> :

"The human species, the sluggish Homo sapiens, will once again enter the stage of radical reconstruction and become in his own hands the object of the most complex methods of artificial selection and psychophysical training... Man will make it his goal...to create a higher sociobiological type, a superman, if you will"

New Soviet man - Wikipedia



“And they said you’d be a proud one. Still the Comintern movie star. The vanity, the narcissism, the love of self. That is why you’ll never be a true Soviet man. You can’t let the love affair you have with your mirror go; you’re too used to being special.” From the novel “Havana,” Stephen Hunter



The birth of "The New Soviet Man" was the stated aim of Marxism, breeding a new evolutionary form of human being who will think, look, and act differently. The next footage was the Nazi attempt to do exactly the same thing: in German, "We must create a new man! A new life form should appear!"

a. "In both systems we have the ideology of creating a new man. Both systems don't agree with human nature as it is...they are at war with human nature. Both are based on false biology, and false sociology."
Françoise Thom, professor of Soviet history, Sorbonne, Paris




. In 1969, Hillary Rodham gave the student commencement address at Wellesley in which she said that “ for too long our leaders have used politics as the art of making what appears to be impossible, possible….We’re not interested in social reconstruction; it’s human reconstruction.”
http://www.wellesley.edu/PublicAffa..._____________________________________________

I am not a "Leftist" and as far as fundamentals go, you agree with them on everything; you do not believe in reality as the basis of reality, you disregard reason as the means in which to obtain knowledge about reality and you hold altruism as the highest moral value.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As I have taught myself a great deal.about history (and so many other topics as my brain requires constant stimulation via reading or communicating) I have thought about this very subject. People of faith have a heavy burden to carry, many abandon this duty including Christians and Jews. Judaism in fact has the biggest burden in my opinion as G-d specifically stated the duties of faith, to be the role models if you will. All peaceful people of faith are persecuted be it Jews during WWII and in the Middle East, or Christians in the Middle East, Africa and the like. By the very nature of being peaceful, the violent non-believers, especially communists/fascists, will exploit the peaceful nature of believers. In my estimation, believer or not; the universe will have its.way with such souls. So many outcomes in nature suggests this. The Torah should be the guide of people of the Abrahamic faith in my.opinion, not man made inducements. Just the 613 Mitvah alone would dictate the just way in which we must live our lives, caring for one another in time of need, protecting justice (not evil violations) and the downtrodden.

"...my brain requires constant stimulation via reading or communicating)"

Oh.....so you're not a Democrat.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is it fair to assume you were a victim of Sunday school?

You don't want to answer.

Proves what I guessed.


One of us is an Ivy League grad, with advanced degrees, and has "valedictorian" in their CV....and the other is you.

And, yes....I read the Bible...both Testaments.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is factually incorrect.

Proves how ignorant you are, and that you've swallowed the hype from the Left.



"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field." Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513, Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16.



"There are no laboratory demonstrations of speciation, millions of fruit flies coming and going while never once suggesting that they were destined to appear as anything other than fruit flies.
More than six thousand years of breeding and artificial selection, barnyard and backyard, have never induced a chicken to lay a square egg or persuade a pig to develop wheels or ball bearings."
Berlinski


"...the neo-Darwinian mechanism of mutation and natural selection lacks the creative power to generate the novel anatomical traits and forms of life that have arisen during the history of life. Yet, as Müller noted, neo-Darwinian theory continues to be presented to the public via textbooks as the canonical understanding of how new living forms arose — reflecting precisely the tension between the perceived, and actual, status of the theory...."

Why the Royal Society Meeting Mattered, in a Nutshell | Evolution News​

The proceedings confirmed something that advocates of intelligent design, including Stephen Meyer and others, have been saying for years.

evolutionnews.org




Don't be a dunce your whole life.....take a day off.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I am not a "Leftist" and as far as fundamentals go, you agree with them on everything; you do not believe in reality as the basis of reality, you disregard reason as the means in which to obtain knowledge about reality and you hold altruism as the highest moral value.

And after you wrote this, what did you do with the rest of the fortune cookie?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I am not a "Leftist" and as far as fundamentals go, you agree with them on everything; you do not believe in reality as the basis of reality, you disregard reason as the means in which to obtain knowledge about reality and you hold altruism as the highest moral value.

Please continue to post so I can wipe up another section of the floor with you.

 

[Trickster]

You don't want to answer.

Proves what I guessed.

You are correct, but why does that matter?

One of us is an Ivy League grad, with advanced degrees, and has "valedictorian" in their CV....and the other is you.

That's awesome, congrats.

And, yes....I read the Bible...both Testaments.

I'm sorry to hear that.

 

[alang1216]

If you don't mention heiristocracy in the mix and dominating the other three, you're just a groveling serf.

Apples and oranges . I listed economic systems, not political systems.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You are correct, but why does that matter?

That's awesome, congrats.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Let me put on my psychic chapeaux again: you voted for the Fascists, and cannot explain your vote.
How'd I do?

 

[Trickster]

Let me put on my psychic chapeaux again: you voted for the Fascists, and cannot explain your vote.
How'd I do?

I didn't vote. I had better things to do.

"Chapeaux" is plural.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Apples and oranges . I listed economic systems, not political systems.

The are one and the same.

Or.....which Communists or Nazis or Democrats strand by a policy of capitalism and free markets?

Having you explain economics is like having Dr Kevorkian teaching the Heimlich Maneuver.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I didn't vote. I had better things to do.

You give new meaning to the term "useless."


Find somewhere else to post.....I'd rather someone with skin in the game.

But before you go, take notes on the FACTS that I taught you about Darwn's Theory and the Bible, ok, Loki?