Global warming - climate change
- Thread starter MessageOfTheCross
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
O
If God can use a donkey to reveal truths, why would He be limited to not use science as a tool for us. Outside of putting His Spoken Word(s) into context, everything He did aligns perfectly under Design, Engineering, Mathematics. In Job, He even emphasizes about using a string (tape measure)(part of constructing the universe with mathematics and Engineering (science)) to measure the Universe at that time.
The term pattern is always calculated which is mathematical. And God patterned, or made the official patent on ALL things. This ties the Laws of Engineering - Mathematics - science to court law. And we know He is our Mediator (Lawyer/Litigator/Representation) before the Father. And since we know He created it all, speaks about how He measures, how He keeps things in place in space, all reveals the Laws of Physics (gravity - inertia - electromagnetic's - components of mathematics).
God established every human practice/skill/trade.
Man corrupted it.
But, it does not mean we are not able to use it, because it's originally a tool for us, from God.
Yes.
It wasn't what I was taught, and I have an IQ of 140 and scored in the 99th percentile of every test of aptitude or mastery I ever took--so I think I would remember. Given your track record of confusion on the basic facts of global warming seen just in this thread, you'll excuse me if I don't take your word for it when it comes to the state of scientific knowledge in the 70s.
Current and historical evidence does not agree with your assertion (see my previous posts).
I'm not sure why you find it "inconvenient" to acknowledge the truth. Having intellectual integrity doesn't mean you agree to do something to change the facts; it just means that you pull your head out of the sand and recognize the facts. It's perfectly ok to say, "Ok, the Earth is getting hotter, but there's nothing that I can or want to do about it." It's not ok to say, "La la la la la scientists are talking but I cannot hear them la la la la la"...
I don't know what "should" be done, or even what CAN be done, if anything. That's a different discussion. This discussion is just about the fact that the Earth is getting hotter, and it's probably because of human actions over the last couple of centuries. What you choose to do about that is up to you--but hiding your eyes from the plain fact is intellectually irresponsible.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/49493993/this-is-fine.0.jpg)
It wasn't what I was taught, and I have an IQ of 140 and scored in the 99th percentile of every test of aptitude or mastery I ever took--so I think I would remember. Given your track record of confusion on the basic facts of global warming seen just in this thread, you'll excuse me if I don't take your word for it when it comes to the state of scientific knowledge in the 70s.
Current and historical evidence does not agree with your assertion (see my previous posts).
I'm not sure why you find it "inconvenient" to acknowledge the truth. Having intellectual integrity doesn't mean you agree to do something to change the facts; it just means that you pull your head out of the sand and recognize the facts. It's perfectly ok to say, "Ok, the Earth is getting hotter, but there's nothing that I can or want to do about it." It's not ok to say, "La la la la la scientists are talking but I cannot hear them la la la la la"...
I don't know what "should" be done, or even what CAN be done, if anything. That's a different discussion. This discussion is just about the fact that the Earth is getting hotter, and it's probably because of human actions over the last couple of centuries. What you choose to do about that is up to you--but hiding your eyes from the plain fact is intellectually irresponsible.
O
God chose to be in the human home of a carpenter. Being a Carpenter is the same as Engineering - machining - using skills in a trade with Mathematical values - someone crafty to understand a craft - someone able to envision an idea and make it into a physical object we can use - someone who loves a challenging puzzle - it all boils down to someone who wanted to Create Space, planets, forms of life - and add Morality to it so He could ultimately connect to His Creation.
Many people have no CLUE who and what God is ALL about, who He ultimately is in every facet, aspect, crevice, called His Existence.
Many still look at the picture of the white guy in long darker blonde hair in a white looking covering and think this is who I'll be meeting in heaven
And because many have such a limited view of God, it's hard for them to envision who He in reality is, as the whole phenomena of God in every aspect of our human life.
Many people have no CLUE who and what God is ALL about, who He ultimately is in every facet, aspect, crevice, called His Existence.
Many still look at the picture of the white guy in long darker blonde hair in a white looking covering and think this is who I'll be meeting in heaven
And because many have such a limited view of God, it's hard for them to envision who He in reality is, as the whole phenomena of God in every aspect of our human life.
-
1
- Show all
I was hoping that was a "WOW" of enlightenment there for a second, but it wasn't long before my hopes were dashed...
I'm not denying Scripture's authority; I'm just clarifying the topics on which Scripture IS an authority--namely, spiritual truths. Scripture is intended to be the authority for spiritual matters; it was not intended to be a historical or scientific authority.
If you wanted to make a pan of lasagna, you wouldn't go the Bible, right? Of course not--you'd go to a cook book--because the Bible isn't intended to be an authority on cooking. If you want to learn about history or science, go to a history or science book--they are the authorities on those topics. If you want to learn about God and His relationship to man, go to the Bible--it's the authority on that.
I'm not denying Scripture's authority; I'm just clarifying the topics on which Scripture IS an authority--namely, spiritual truths. Scripture is intended to be the authority for spiritual matters; it was not intended to be a historical or scientific authority.
If you wanted to make a pan of lasagna, you wouldn't go the Bible, right? Of course not--you'd go to a cook book--because the Bible isn't intended to be an authority on cooking. If you want to learn about history or science, go to a history or science book--they are the authorities on those topics. If you want to learn about God and His relationship to man, go to the Bible--it's the authority on that.
Sure.
We all know that the Greek letter "chi" (which looks like an "X") has traditionally stood for "Christ" throughout the centuries (as in "Xmas"), so a "Xian" is a Christian.
Zen is a philosophy aimed at apprehending the objective Truth behind the symbols, perceptions and interpretations of Truth that are so often mistaken for the Truth themselves.
So a "zen Xian" is a Christian who is concerned with a deeper understanding of the Truth beyond the mere words and images of faith.
We all know that the Greek letter "chi" (which looks like an "X") has traditionally stood for "Christ" throughout the centuries (as in "Xmas"), so a "Xian" is a Christian.
Zen is a philosophy aimed at apprehending the objective Truth behind the symbols, perceptions and interpretations of Truth that are so often mistaken for the Truth themselves.
So a "zen Xian" is a Christian who is concerned with a deeper understanding of the Truth beyond the mere words and images of faith.
O
I like many of your ideas and viewpoints because I know you do not live by faith, but by proofs. You give yourself away easily. Anyways, I believe the way you are, in viewing meanings of ancient symbols/cultures you seem to use, you are leaning towards New Age more than anything else. You might even be partial christian science. It's an interesting mixture you have going, because it's a chance for us to learn about your viewpoints, from your teachers.
I say all of that, because the post of yours I have quoted ^ signifies you believe in a value system - promotion - even like obtaining Dan's in self defense/awareness. It's like you want to achieve to be a teacher/master and you have these values you must climb to.
I absolutely disagree with it all, but even in that, some of your posts make sense due to philosophy that has already been proven. And there are many truths in science we can accept, and it will not ever conflict with our walk in God!!
-
1
- Show all
Well, that's not entirely true--any "proofs" are predicated on faith, so it would be more accurate to say that I live by faith first, and then by what I can prove from that in which I have faith.
The only thing we can know for certain is the fact of our own existence ("I think I think, therefore, I think I am"). After that, all "facts" are based in one of the following three types of faith:
1) Faith in our own personal experiences (that is, faith that a "real world" exists outside of our own heads, and that at least some of our perceptions and sensations are reflective of that reality);
2) Faith in the testimony of others regarding their own personal experiences; or...
3) Faith in the axioms of formal systems of reasoning.
Once you take those leaps of faith to some basic premises, then you can construct proofs of higher constructs--but it's important to always remember that everything you "know" (outside of the fact of your own existence) is based in faith.
If you mean that I am transparent and will tell you what I am really thinking without hiding who I am or what I think, then yes, I would say that I do. If you mean that I betray myself or my integrity to follow unsubstantiated nonsense, then I think that nothing could be further from the truth.
Not at all. I have considered just about everything that I have ever heard being labeled as "New Age" to be unsubstantiated nonsense.
More unsubstantiated nonsense. Remember, I am all about transcending labels and symbols; I simply try to know God as directly and completely as humanly possible. I am a skeptic and a philosopher and a scientist and a prophet all rolled into one.
I don't know that I have "teachers" per se; at least, I couldn't name any. Obviously, I have learned things throughout my life from people who knew more than me, but I would consider God my ultimate teacher, in that He has brought these things to my attention, and given me the intellect to understand them.
One time when I was in college and struggling a little with the conflict between what I had been taught about God and what I was coming to learn about the world, God gave me this verse--it actually appeared to be printed in boldface type in my Bible for a few hours, before going back to normal:
"But as for you, the anointing (the sacred appointment, the unction) which you received from Him abides [permanently] in you; [so] then you have no need that anyone should instruct you. But just as His anointing teaches you concerning everything and is true and is no falsehood, so you must abide in (live in, never depart from) Him [being rooted in Him, knit to Him], just as [His anointing] has taught you [to do]." --1 John 2:27 (Amplified Bible)
And so I have, and He has kept up His end of the bargain too.
I don't have any idea what any of this means. I guess it's your turn to be a teacher.
Eh, I'm fine with just being a prophet. I don't feel the need to aspire to anything else, and I don't think I could ever think of myself as a "master" anyway.
Absolutely.
"But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things]..." --1 Corinthians 2:15a (Amplified Bible)
The only thing we can know for certain is the fact of our own existence ("I think I think, therefore, I think I am"). After that, all "facts" are based in one of the following three types of faith:
1) Faith in our own personal experiences (that is, faith that a "real world" exists outside of our own heads, and that at least some of our perceptions and sensations are reflective of that reality);
2) Faith in the testimony of others regarding their own personal experiences; or...
3) Faith in the axioms of formal systems of reasoning.
Once you take those leaps of faith to some basic premises, then you can construct proofs of higher constructs--but it's important to always remember that everything you "know" (outside of the fact of your own existence) is based in faith.
If you mean that I am transparent and will tell you what I am really thinking without hiding who I am or what I think, then yes, I would say that I do. If you mean that I betray myself or my integrity to follow unsubstantiated nonsense, then I think that nothing could be further from the truth.
Not at all. I have considered just about everything that I have ever heard being labeled as "New Age" to be unsubstantiated nonsense.
More unsubstantiated nonsense. Remember, I am all about transcending labels and symbols; I simply try to know God as directly and completely as humanly possible. I am a skeptic and a philosopher and a scientist and a prophet all rolled into one.
I don't know that I have "teachers" per se; at least, I couldn't name any. Obviously, I have learned things throughout my life from people who knew more than me, but I would consider God my ultimate teacher, in that He has brought these things to my attention, and given me the intellect to understand them.
One time when I was in college and struggling a little with the conflict between what I had been taught about God and what I was coming to learn about the world, God gave me this verse--it actually appeared to be printed in boldface type in my Bible for a few hours, before going back to normal:
"But as for you, the anointing (the sacred appointment, the unction) which you received from Him abides [permanently] in you; [so] then you have no need that anyone should instruct you. But just as His anointing teaches you concerning everything and is true and is no falsehood, so you must abide in (live in, never depart from) Him [being rooted in Him, knit to Him], just as [His anointing] has taught you [to do]." --1 John 2:27 (Amplified Bible)
And so I have, and He has kept up His end of the bargain too.
I don't have any idea what any of this means. I guess it's your turn to be a teacher.
Eh, I'm fine with just being a prophet. I don't feel the need to aspire to anything else, and I don't think I could ever think of myself as a "master" anyway.
Absolutely.
"But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things]..." --1 Corinthians 2:15a (Amplified Bible)
-
1
- Show all
O
It was this post from you in the "Jesus Seen in the Sky" thread that opened my eyes. You attacked a Dreamer. Many great men of God have been Dreamers.
One of the traits that human beings have developed to help them survive in and make sense of their environment is the ability to detect patterns in the world around them. Sometimes this is useful, such as when we note that the fish are easier to catch at dusk, but sometimes it makes us see patterns in things that are actually just random. Seeing shapes of things in the clouds is one such misapplication of that skill. For instance, at the top of the cloudline, I can see an elephant licking the back of a koala bear.
The "image of Jesus" you see above is really just a crack in the clouds, allowing light from the setting sun to stream through. In fact, "Jesus" wouldn't have a body at all if it wasn't for the light streaming through, as his "body" is really just that shaft of light. So are the flowing robes we would associate with Jesus, although they could just as easily be a cape, and the figure could just as easily be that of Superman (which would explain why he has his arms out like he is flying).
It's good to see God in the world around you--what you perceive in the world is often a reflection of what you are expecting to see--so it reflects well upon you that you are looking for God in the world around you. But do keep in mind that in this case, it is more of a reflection of your faith than it is a special manifestation of God.
I knew your philosophy was not inline 100% with God at all. You see common sense points and pick them and it makes you appear you are a believer, but you are about the facts/proofs. There are facts and proofs out there that will provide the truths you have been searching for. But you have to want to find them.
One of the traits that human beings have developed to help them survive in and make sense of their environment is the ability to detect patterns in the world around them. Sometimes this is useful, such as when we note that the fish are easier to catch at dusk, but sometimes it makes us see patterns in things that are actually just random. Seeing shapes of things in the clouds is one such misapplication of that skill. For instance, at the top of the cloudline, I can see an elephant licking the back of a koala bear.
The "image of Jesus" you see above is really just a crack in the clouds, allowing light from the setting sun to stream through. In fact, "Jesus" wouldn't have a body at all if it wasn't for the light streaming through, as his "body" is really just that shaft of light. So are the flowing robes we would associate with Jesus, although they could just as easily be a cape, and the figure could just as easily be that of Superman (which would explain why he has his arms out like he is flying).
It's good to see God in the world around you--what you perceive in the world is often a reflection of what you are expecting to see--so it reflects well upon you that you are looking for God in the world around you. But do keep in mind that in this case, it is more of a reflection of your faith than it is a special manifestation of God.
I knew your philosophy was not inline 100% with God at all. You see common sense points and pick them and it makes you appear you are a believer, but you are about the facts/proofs. There are facts and proofs out there that will provide the truths you have been searching for. But you have to want to find them.
I'm not sure how you could interpret anything I wrote (which you quoted) as an "attack." I simply explained the phenomenon of apophenia (seeing patterns in random data), and then closed with what a good reflection it was upon her faith that she would see God in the world around her, as it shows more about what is in her heart than what is in the world.
You call that an "attack"?
I'm sorry that you feel that way. Fortunately, it's not up to you.
As I just explained, I couldn't be about facts and proofs without first being a believer. I do believe that faith can and should be rational, however.
I don't think I will ever stop yearning for and aspiring to ever-closer approximations of the Truth.
You call that an "attack"?
I'm sorry that you feel that way. Fortunately, it's not up to you.
As I just explained, I couldn't be about facts and proofs without first being a believer. I do believe that faith can and should be rational, however.
I don't think I will ever stop yearning for and aspiring to ever-closer approximations of the Truth.
Reasoning and faith should not be at odds, since reasoning is based in faith, and both are required of us by God.
"Always be ready to give a logical defense to anyone who asks you to account for the hope that is in you, but do it courteously and respectfully." --1 Peter 3:15b (Amplified Bible)
If you find that your reason is at odds with your faith on some matter, then you are probably not understanding that matter correctly.
I think you may not be understanding what the word "transcend" means. The dictionary definition is to "be or go beyond the range or limits of"; so having an understanding of God that transcends the symbols we use to stand for Him means that we understand the real, actual, GOD--and not just what the word "God" means. I seek to go beyond the limits of the words and symbols of Christianity, to apprehend the true meaning behind them, the actuality, rather than the potentiality.
The Bible disagrees with your assessment that we should not apply the word "transcend" to Godly matters.
"And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus." --Philippians 4:7 (NIV)
The word "transcends" is also used in the Amplified Bible, which, together with the NIV, constitute my two favorite translations, although other translations use words like "exceeds, passeth, and surpasses"--they are all functionally equivalent.
Truth is truth, regardless of the source. Some (including myself) would say that God is ultimately the source of all truth, but not all truth can be found in the Bible (the winner of the last Super Bowl, for instance, cannot be found in the Bible). By seeking after truth and following wherever it may lead, one's perception of truth can gradually be refined to more closely approximate objective, absolute Truth. In other words, following truth wherever it may be found and clinging to it wherever it takes you will eventually lead you to God.
I didn't "make her" do anything; I helped her to understand something, if she wishes to do so (and she did post a thread asking for our explanations).
As for reason eroding faith; again, see 1 Peter 3:15b (cited above). Reason is based in faith, and faith is strengthened by reason. As Albert Einstein once said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
I'm not sure I'm making sense of this, and what sense I am making of it seems patently false (in that parameters are required to define any task that can be accomplished). I also have no idea what the phrase "broken philosophy" might mean, or what the "limits of faith" are.
Perhaps you can clarify?
God.
"Always be ready to give a logical defense to anyone who asks you to account for the hope that is in you, but do it courteously and respectfully." --1 Peter 3:15b (Amplified Bible)
If you find that your reason is at odds with your faith on some matter, then you are probably not understanding that matter correctly.
I think you may not be understanding what the word "transcend" means. The dictionary definition is to "be or go beyond the range or limits of"; so having an understanding of God that transcends the symbols we use to stand for Him means that we understand the real, actual, GOD--and not just what the word "God" means. I seek to go beyond the limits of the words and symbols of Christianity, to apprehend the true meaning behind them, the actuality, rather than the potentiality.
The Bible disagrees with your assessment that we should not apply the word "transcend" to Godly matters.
"And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus." --Philippians 4:7 (NIV)
The word "transcends" is also used in the Amplified Bible, which, together with the NIV, constitute my two favorite translations, although other translations use words like "exceeds, passeth, and surpasses"--they are all functionally equivalent.
Truth is truth, regardless of the source. Some (including myself) would say that God is ultimately the source of all truth, but not all truth can be found in the Bible (the winner of the last Super Bowl, for instance, cannot be found in the Bible). By seeking after truth and following wherever it may lead, one's perception of truth can gradually be refined to more closely approximate objective, absolute Truth. In other words, following truth wherever it may be found and clinging to it wherever it takes you will eventually lead you to God.
I didn't "make her" do anything; I helped her to understand something, if she wishes to do so (and she did post a thread asking for our explanations).
As for reason eroding faith; again, see 1 Peter 3:15b (cited above). Reason is based in faith, and faith is strengthened by reason. As Albert Einstein once said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
I'm not sure I'm making sense of this, and what sense I am making of it seems patently false (in that parameters are required to define any task that can be accomplished). I also have no idea what the phrase "broken philosophy" might mean, or what the "limits of faith" are.
Perhaps you can clarify?
God.
U
A person can reason themselves into a lot of untruth.
As well faith can be placed in many wrong places.
And putting reason and faith together still does not ensure a good outcome.
Now I am not speaking to "biblical" faith are you?
....And certainly one does not need science for religion, and one can be blind with both religion and science...so I guess he was wrong on that account.
As well faith can be placed in many wrong places.
And putting reason and faith together still does not ensure a good outcome.
Now I am not speaking to "biblical" faith are you?
....And certainly one does not need science for religion, and one can be blind with both religion and science...so I guess he was wrong on that account.