97turbojbody wrote:oh and about the cancer leaving and sicknesses and all part that i wrote, you guys completely ignored the rest. how would you explain that? I have seen it with my own eyes.
You know sometimes you're sick and then you get back to normal!!! Same things apply for disease, the body find enough energy to fight back and eliminate it by itself!!!! Not everyone have this kind of luck, but it happen and it happen too often to be a miracle!! Why some people deserve to die while others deserve to live??? If it was miracles, god would let the bad peoples die and the good ones live... but it doesn't happen like that!!! Back to the topic!!
Quote:
how do you know how long a "day" was to God... did God mention that his day was 365 days
I meant 24 hours, it is late
97turbojbody wrote:oh and about the cancer leaving and sicknesses and all part that i wrote, you guys completely ignored the rest. how would you explain that? I have seen it with my own eyes.
we skipped it?
i believe i went IN DEPTH on how these "miracles happen"
here was my response to you actually buddy:
Nathaniel wrote:actually the majority of our brain is active. the %10 thing is old. we just cant figure out what the majority of the active areas of the brain are being used for.
also this months TIME magazine the cover story reads "how we became human" we share 99% of our DNA with chimps.
evolution in no way attempts to disprove god or say there is no god. Evolution happens, period dot. it is PROVEN without a doubt. this fact should not in any way contradict any religions text.
as far as "miracles" go. as was said "miracles" have nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with the scientific fact that is evolution.
however, my personal stand on miracles is that most are easily explainable with basic understanding of biology and chemistry. which still doesnt disprove god. you dont need miracles to prove god or have god.
most miracles are very similar to the ailment themselves. Cancer cells are rouge cells that do not carry the code to stop reproducing once a certain cell desnity occurs in a certain part of the body. so they keep multiplying and multiplying on top of eachother creating tumors and sometimes then traveling through the bloodstream to different parts of the body. most times the body can control this going on. however it is within the bodies capablities to start recognizing these rouges cells and attempt to turn on the code to tell them to stop. the cancer cells stop overly reproducing, and then they then go through the bodies natural cell lifecycle die off and the cell density in given area returns to normal.
it would be far more far fetched for it to be a instant poof of deleting the cancer cells than it would be the bodies natural ability to maintain homeostasis.
but again, that does not disprove god. if anything you could even view it as evidence of god if you like.
----------------------------
GAM-
GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:You need to establish the base-line to find the C14 ratios, er go you need C12 amounts relative to the time period (as both fluctuate, and depending on ambient conditions and cosmic ray bombardment, there may be more or less of both elements). Short term Cabon Dating (at least in a forensic terminology that I'm aware of) is referred to as C-12, although C-14 is used interchangably.
right. i understand that hence why i said: c12 is the stable normal version in which they use to calculate how much c14 there was in the first place
carbon dating is called c14 carbon dating. this is because they are directly calculating the half lifes of the radioactive isotope carbon14. to do radio c14 dating you must also need to know how much c12 there was at the time. because in a almost universal constant way, the ratio of c12:c14 is almost always the same. so if they find out how much c12 there is they can then calculate how many half lifes have went by of c14 based on how much c14 is left within the object. if they know how many half lifes have gone by then they know how old the object is.
c14's half life is 5700 years.
so if you know that there is an object and it has 1/8 of its c14 left. this would make the object 17,100 years old. if there is 1/8 left than that means 3 half lifes have passed = 3* 5700
there are other methods of carbon dating but traditional radioactive carbon dating is called c14 carbon dating.
Creative Draft Art Media Forums
I've seen short term cases (ie, 25-50 years) where C14 was nigh useless. You need to use C12 because you can track that in the ambient air and vegetation, C14 hasn't decayed enough to be measurable.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Genisis states that BEFORE the formation of the planets (including Earth), God created light and divided the light from the dark, and call the light periods "Day". In that sense "day" is a period of light that divides the dark. That is all. There is noreference to time at all. There is certainly no Earth yet, so there's very little likelyhood that "day" is the same as a "day" on Earth. The term "day" was defined before Earth existed and we borrowed the name "day" to refer to light periods (that divide the dark periods) here on Earth. So one more time.. The term "day" refers to light that divides the dark, the term existed before the Earth did and we use the term (appropriately) to describe similar events here on Earth. "Day" does not mean 24 hours, in fact it has little to do with time at all except that time passes and day becomes darkness again, then darkness yields to day.. The cycle repeats. The on time factor is the fact that there is a progression but not definate time period is defined.
Attempting to assign values to the act of Creation is futile and somewhat arrogant. God does not need to conform to our ideals at all and because God transends time, God need not conform to any of our ideals regarding time. Time is simply a refernce for us mere mortals so we can make sense of events.
To explain "backwards" revolution or orbits, simply look at a river. You'll notice "eddy" currents swirling and moving in the opposite direction of the main current. These are prevelant along any river but easier to spot in places were the river turns a corner or has uneven errosion along the bank. As material was flung outward some would have varying desities etc causing some uneveness in the motion. That uneven movement could cause eddies and therefore start some (the minority) of the material to swirl in an opposing direction to the surrounding material. Then there's impacts etc as explained above.
Denying observations in God's creation is denying yourself the opportunity to marvel at its complexity and beauty. You do not need to deny those things that God created in order to defend God. God is almighty and can withstand any criticism, honest.
PAX
<joke> But if the telemarketers are to be taken at face value, the only thing he can't do is handle money </joke>
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
I'm not even going to touch the "miracles."
Nathan - IIRC - Malignant cancer cells do not repsond to the self-destuct messeges from the body. That is one of the requirements to upgrade a tumor from benign to malignant - IIRC
also - One of the formentioned "problems" with carbon dating is background radiation. Radiation from other sources can speed the radioactive decay of C14. Random radioactive particles colliding with a isotopic atom may cause it to break apart - essentially the same process as in a nuclear reaction but on a smaller, slower scale. This in turn makes for less C14 than there should be on its own - how much of a difference depends on exactly how much background radiation you are talking about. Check the age on someone who died at Chernobyl and they might seem pretty old via carbon dating.
I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?
benign and malignant- neither respond to self destruct. thats what makes them cancers. cancer are cells not responding to the self destruct message encoded in their dna. malignant however has the possibility of not staying localized. the cells can leech through vessel walls and travel potentially anywhere in the body and start mass producing with no auto-shut off.
the reason why it is possible for cancer to stop or go away is via soem kind of genetic error in their reproduction (ie exactly the same thing that caused the cancer cells in the first place but in reverse) which could potentially turn the auto shut off back on. this would severely slow the process of cancer reproduction. the body also has the potential to while rare detect that these cells are slightly off, and attack them.
the ability for the human body to get rid of or stop cancer is there, it doesnt take a miracle although it may seem like it. and who knows, maybe in some cases it is. but it still remains that the body DOES have the ability to do so.
Creative Draft Art Media Forums
[quote=Nathaniel O'Flaherty
we skipped it?
i believe i went IN DEPTH on how these "miracles happen"
here was my response to you actually buddy:
Yes you skipped it.
97turbojbody wrote:
crooked legs straightening out, eyes developing, the blind begin to see, the deaf begin to hear, the dumb begin to speak, people that were told that they can't walk the rest of their life, stand up out of their wheel chairs and start walking, legs and arms growing out, sicknesses leaving immediately without leaving a trace
Hmmm. i thought i also wrote this part, not only about cancer. Whatever guys just stop discussing my part. I don't care if this is a war forum, i don't want to be part of it.
97turbojbody wrote:[quote=Nathaniel O'Flaherty
we skipped it?
i believe i went IN DEPTH on how these "miracles happen"
here was my response to you actually buddy:
Yes you skipped it.
97turbojbody wrote:
crooked legs straightening out, eyes developing, the blind begin to see, the deaf begin to hear, the dumb begin to speak, people that were told that they can't walk the rest of their life, stand up out of their wheel chairs and start walking, legs and arms growing out, sicknesses leaving immediately without leaving a trace
Hmmm. i thought i also wrote this part, not only about cancer. Whatever guys just stop discussing my part. I don't care if this is a war forum, i don't want to be part of it.
If they can be imperically proven, lets see it.
Bones straightening: Not without surgery or re-breaking. Sorry.
Eyes developing: if it's not there to begin with, it's not just going to spontaneously regenerate, you're not a gecko.
Visual/auditory senses regenerating: it happens... nervous response is sometimes disorganised, and when it gets sorted out you get the senses back.. if you have no olfactory nerves or optical nerve damage, it's like hitting the gas when you have no throttle cable.
Dumb people speaking: You're not going to go in with the IQ of a house plant and come out reciting Shakespearean sonnets in perfect iambic pentameter... When brain matter is damaged, it cannot regenerate... for proof look no further than Terry Schiavo: Parts of her brain had deteriorated into spinal fluid, she wasn't there in any kind of lucid way.
Appendages regenerating: again, you're not a gecko.
Standing up from a wheel chair: turn off Benny Hinn... The only difference between him and a Snake oil salesman is money. Hinn picks people that have no visible specific ailment (like curing a Goiter, not something you can just HEEEEEEEEEEAL away), and cures them of what they don't have (he likes Diabetic cases).
Sicknesses: Again, Turn Hinn off. He hasn't produced a single piece of evidence of a Miraculous Cure... and neither has any soothsayer. of what they say
Seriously, pull your head out of the sand.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
well, it appears that we won that debate... lol
is this the first time on the .org that one side has basically given up?
Now the question that begs is "what was won?"
The an evolutionary model is not contadictory to the Bible? That's what I'd like to say was won, but hey, some like to eliminate God altogether, I certainly disagree with that.
PAX
Oh ya, this is for Chris if he's tuned in....
You talk about ritual in the Catholic Church as "hokus pokus" etc and that you do not subscribe to all that.. Tell me.. Are you married? Did you get married in a church? Do you wear a ring? Does your wife? If you don't believe in the "hokus pokus" then why did you have a marriage cerimony? Why do you wear a ring? Why don't you burn the documents and throw away the ring? Seriously.. What better example of ritual and symbolism is there in our society?
How do you feel about the actions of Jesus at the last supper? Was the breaking of bread not just another old Jewish ritual? Are you denying the Jewish roots of Christianity? Do you celebrate Christmas? Do you not see that by accepting some ritual you give some weight to all ritual?
Ritual serves a purpose, hopefully you can see that now. It's not for God, there you are right, it is for us. Remember, God has no need al all.
PAX
^^^And coincidentally, prayer in and of itself, like the ritual burning of Franincense and Myrrh are rituals carried over their pagan roots.
Just about ever religion has rituals in some form or the other--hell, even the "scientific method" could be considered a ritual of sorts.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Just more proof of God's existance. All religions have some overlap, common areas of "sacred truth" (for lack of a better term).
Anything that is done the same way everytime is a ritual. For some, showering is a ritual.
Thanks Keeper.
PAX
Not necessarily. It could be said that a ritual is a set series of actions (in mind or physical) that put one in the proper mindset.
Could it mean that any "ritual" is basically calling God on the hotline? Maybe
Could it mean that each special ritual is the way of contacting a specific God on the hotline? Maybe
Could it mean that each ritual is just a manner of focusing your mind to approach the task at hand with a clear consience? Maybe
Could it mean that each ritual sets your mind in a method that can supernaturally alter events to come out to your liking, based on the strenght of the ritual? Maybe
I won't say any of those are right or wrong--or if i left something out. Pick the answer you like that works for you. Just realize that rituals, like answetrs, are tailored to the individual person.
As for saying that it's proof of God, not necessarily. For those that hold belief in God, it bolsters their argument. For those that believe in many Gods, it bolsters their argument. For those that believe in human supernatural capabilities, it bolsters their argument, for those that beleive there is not god and it's all in the mind, it bolsters their argument.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
I deal with my reality.. OK?
You make good points, but I disagree in a way. I would state that anything that follows a set of action is ritual whether it has anything to do with religion or not. If you always tie your left shoe first then you ritually tie your left shoe.. See?
PAX
I know you do
Anyhow, i didn't mean to make it seem like i'm pidgeonholing ritual into religion. As a set series of mental or physical actions to put you in the right mindset for something--it doesn't have to be religious.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Ok, so this is a really really long discussion and one that I am not really all that interested in reading everyones ideas and chasing every rabbit that has come about. I shall stick to the first idea and that being evolution. I am a firm believer in God as it should be as I am a ministry major at a christian college. And I strongly agree with evolution...to a point. I donnt believe that we came from apes, but to deny that evolution in animals doesnt exist would be complete idiocy. Species have to adapt to survive a changing world. So please do not make the assumption that every christian is the same. I would tackle more questions but I am tired, I am always wiling to get into a good debate though....
Levi: it's worth the time to read it.
There's more on this in other threads.
Basically, I don't (and rarely have in my memory) lumped ALL Christians into a group where people are unwilling to accept evolution as a real and founded concept. Hell, DARWIN was Anglican, and most people in the scientific community understand that the book of genesis is metaphorical. Do they state definitively that God does not exist... No. Whatever their personal beliefs, scientists live and die by what they can prove and what they can publish.
We share a little over 90% of our DNA with other mammals (most closely simians, small rodents, and sea-going mammals like dolphins and whales), It's not far-fetched to believe that humans are descended from apes, and that that was God's plan. We don't know that. However, evolution is NOT incompatible with God or the bible (when taken as it is, a story to assuage the questions of a subsistence based culture), it's merely incompatible with creationists' and fundamentalists' ideals.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Quote:
Ok, so this is a really really long discussion and one that I am not really all that interested in reading everyones ideas and chasing every rabbit that has come about. I shall stick to the first idea and that being evolution. I am a firm believer in God as it should be as I am a ministry major at a christian college. And I strongly agree with evolution...to a point. I donnt believe that we came from apes, but to deny that evolution in animals doesnt exist would be complete idiocy. Species have to adapt to survive a changing world. So please do not make the assumption that every christian is the same. I would tackle more questions but I am tired, I am always wiling to get into a good debate though....
welcome to the discussion... it is refreshing to hear from a Christian that believes in God and the Bible but also realizes that evolution is happening.
I wanted to touch on the ape-human idea. Alot of Christians are turned off by linking a hairy, butt-scratching primate to our species. But, as GAM said, we share around 95-98% of our genes with chimps so the evolutionary jump is very small actually. We are just a primate that walks upright, has a bigger brain, less hair (except Robin Williams lol), and a more complex social organization. If you look at our closest relatives, they are extinct, but the jump from a hominid to H. sapiens is more acceptable. The branch that we derived from apes is at the base of the tree, persay, our lineage is towards the top of this "tree". So you can say that we are related to apes, but not as direct a descendant as creationists fear.
It's not a matter of fear.
PAX
it's not like you not to elaborate...
I think it is fear because Christians put man into his own "special" category, as in we are in a class above all other creatures and made in God's image and all. This idea of evolution puts man in his place as just another mammal and that we are not the "dominant" organism on this planet. I think that is why alot of creationists do not want to accept evolution, it "belittles" our species while the Bible glorifies us and gives our lives purpose.
It may be late, but that was one good post about planets!!! 
Me like to learn things that I'm too lazy to search for!!!