Typhoon struck pineapple land for a reason

[Agoraphobic]

Science today is still struggling (or striving) to find explanations for many things, besides theories for Ice Age, global warming, and a host of other events. We have only just scratched the surface investigating many things. The scientific age is still young and it was only not long ago that we came out of the dark ages which based all our thoughts, laws, and behaviour on supernatural and superstitious beliefs Beliefs in biblical stories are meant for minds that do not question, and having just crawled out of the dark ages, our species is not going to crawl back into that world of simple mindedness. You might have found the answers to all your questions from the Bible, but others will not settle for being told by the elders, they need to find out, investigate, explore. We've only just landed on the moon, the closes celestial body to our Earth, there is still the rest of the universe to explore. And a whole new universe of knowledge to acquire. I prefer it this way.

Cheers!

Scientists today still have trouble explaining the cause of the ice age. But if they look at the Bible (and many have) they would have not failed to see that it was the result of Noah's Flood.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/fit/flood-caused-ice-age

 

[Frodo]

Science today is still struggling (or striving) to find explanations for many things, besides theories for Ice Age, global warming, and a host of other events. We have only just scratched the surface investigating many things. The scientific age is still young and it was only not long ago that we came out of the dark ages which based all our thoughts, laws, and behaviour on supernatural and superstitious beliefs Beliefs in biblical stories are meant for minds that do not question, and having just crawled out of the dark ages, our species is not going to crawl back into that world of simple mindedness. You might have found the answers to all your questions from the Bible, but others will not settle for being told by the elders, they need to find out, investigate, explore. We've only just landed on the moon, the closes celestial body to our Earth, there is still the rest of the universe to explore. And a whole new universe of knowledge to acquire. I prefer it this way.

Cheers!

There is nothing wrong with scientific pursuits and research, I am all for it. Christianity has nothing against science or knowledge. As far as I know, every new scientific discovery and fact only affirms that there is a God. And since God has already told us the history of the world, it makes sense to use that like a "map" to begin our investigation.

 

[Agoraphobic]

I am not against Christianity, or religion. Just that I take it as a personal thing. Those who choose to believe, it is their choice. But I am not for imposing one's beliefs or practices onto others. As for myself, I keep an open mind and will listen to anything (time permitting), but whether I choose to believe or not will depend on a host of other things. For the biblical version, I do not take it literally (eg. the seven days God took to create Earth just simply relates to seven stages and not 24 hour days). BTW, "God" didn't tell us anything, he related through some scribes and prophets in the bible. Like Capt. Kirk and other characters in Star Trek, we're still looking for the "creator."

Cheers!

There is nothing wrong with scientific pursuits and research, I am all for it. Christianity has nothing against science or knowledge. As far as I know, every new scientific discovery and fact only affirms that there is a God. And since God has already told us the history of the world, it makes sense to use that like a "map" to begin our investigation.

 

[Frodo]

I am not against Christianity, or religion. Just that I take it as a personal thing. Those who choose to believe, it is their choice. But I am not for imposing one's beliefs or practices onto others. As for myself, I keep an open mind and will listen to anything (time permitting), but whether I choose to believe or not will depend on a host of other things. For the biblical version, I do not take it literally (eg. the seven days God took to create Earth just simply relates to seven stages and not 24 hour days). BTW, "God" didn't tell us anything, he related through some scribes and prophets in the bible. Like Capt. Kirk and other characters in Star Trek, we're still looking for the "creator."

Cheers!

Indeed the choice of religion is a personal choice. But religion is not like food in a buffet or ice cream flavours. It is about truth claims which each religion makes. As for creation days, why do you take it as stages and not literal days? Is it because of the text itself, or what you think scientists are saying? Since the Bible is God-breathed, it is the same as God telling us. We call this Special Revelation as distinct from General Revelation. Looking for the Creator? Is He missing? Or are we missing the stuff that points to Him?

 

[Agoraphobic]

Religion, at worst is a hoax. I choose to look at the positive, contributory aspects of those in their faiths who contribute to their community, society, humanity. Examples like the Assisi Home at Mt Alvernia Hospital, Kampong Senang organization, provide schools, orphanages, welfare homes, halfway houses for the good in religion, not the divine explanations in their books. These I can see, feel, interact. Whereas the stories in the religious books describe things I have to use my imagination to visualise. I cannot belief they actually happened. more so if they talk about miracles, faith, and all those very abstract things. Because we do not know, we guess. And we like to favour those which makes us feel comfortable, something that reassures us of safety, love, being taken care off. Maybe that's why we subconsciously look for this "creator." In Christianity, the elders have got it all figured out and inserted God into this curious void. Those who accept, fine, good for them, they have arrived. For others, the search goes on.

Cheers!

Indeed the choice of religion is a personal choice. But religion is not like food in a buffet or ice cream flavours. It is about truth claims which each religion makes. As for creation days, why do you take it as stages and not literal days? Is it because of the text itself, or what you think scientists are saying? Since the Bible is God-breathed, it is the same as God telling us. We call this Special Revelation as distinct from General Revelation. Looking for the Creator? Is He missing? Or are we missing the stuff that points to Him?

 

[Frodo]

Religion, at worst is a hoax. I choose to look at the positive, contributory aspects of those in their faiths who contribute to their community, society, humanity. Examples like the Assisi Home at Mt Alvernia Hospital, Kampong Senang organization, provide schools, orphanages, welfare homes, halfway houses for the good in religion, not the divine explanations in their books. These I can see, feel, interact. Whereas the stories in the religious books describe things I have to use my imagination to visualise. I cannot belief they actually happened. more so if they talk about miracles, faith, and all those very abstract things. Because we do not know, we guess. And we like to favour those which makes us feel comfortable, something that reassures us of safety, love, being taken care off. Maybe that's why we subconsciously look for this "creator." In Christianity, the elders have got it all figured out and inserted God into this curious void. Those who accept, fine, good for them, they have arrived. For others, the search goes on.

Cheers!

I wouldn't generalise that religions are hoaxes at worst. Maybe SOME are. But I believe people are religious by nature, since that is how God made us. But somewhere along the line people forget about their Creator, yet the longing for spirituality is still there, a void if you like. So people began to worship many other things besides God, or in addition to Him. Most religions would teach their followers to be good and do good. However there is also the various truth claims made by all religions that set them apart from each other. Incredulity is not an argument against such truth claims, which needs to be examined and tested where possible.

 

[Agoraphobic]

My view is that PRIMITIVE people are superstitious, or religious. In ancient times, people believed in many gods, then they simplified things and lessened it to one god. Now, we understand more about science and nature, take things into our own hands, and take it as there are no gods, or god. Religious laws have evolved and changed into state and national laws, and many are now part of our culture and norms. Many people still have faiths in their beliefs passed down from old and that is because old habits are hard to die.

Cheers!

I wouldn't generalise that religions are hoaxes at worst. Maybe SOME are. But I believe people are religious by nature, since that is how God made us. But somewhere along the line people forget about their Creator, yet the longing for spirituality is still there, a void if you like. So people began to worship many other things besides God, or in addition to Him. Most religions would teach their followers to be good and do good. However there is also the various truth claims made by all religions that set them apart from each other. Incredulity is not an argument against such truth claims, which needs to be examined and tested where possible.

 

[Frodo]

My view is that PRIMITIVE people are superstitious, or religious. In ancient times, people believed in many gods, then they simplified things and lessened it to one god. Now, we understand more about science and nature, take things into our own hands, and take it as there are no gods, or god. Religious laws have evolved and changed into state and national laws, and many are now part of our culture and norms. Many people still have faiths in their beliefs passed down from old and that is because old habits are hard to die.

Cheers!

On the contrary, people may be more superstitious now than ever before http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/paranormal-beliefs-superstition.htm

And earliest religion may be monotheistic rather than polytheistic i.e. polytheism "evolved" out of monotheism http://history.stackexchange.com/questions/732/which-came-first-polytheism-or-monotheism

Science and belief in God are not mutually exclusive, as mentioned earlier, the fathers of modern science were believers and modern science was born in the Christian Western worldview. http://www.newscientist.com/special/god

 

[Agoraphobic]

I go by what my sense tell me in these cases.

My knowledge of religions is simple - first there was animism, where everything was some kind of spirit or supernatural deity, we even used them to describe thunder, and lightning, and rain, and attributed them to gods, or the heavens' anger. Today, we know then as weather, and there are many factors contributing to them. They are not caused by emotions of the gods. Sicknesses and illness are caused by infections, nervous/organ malfunctions, not my spirit possessions.

Yes, science and religion are not mutually exclusive, the more we learn, the more mysteries are opened up. At this point, all I can say is we are still learning. The only difference is that science keeps us looking, searching, and learning more. Religion tells us to accept what the elders tell us.

Throughout our history, there are various beliefs, discoveries, and our understanding depends on how we interpret them; sometimes we get it right, sometimes we don't.

Cheers!

On the contrary, people may be more superstitious now than ever before http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/paranormal-beliefs-superstition.htm

And earliest religion may be monotheistic rather than polytheistic i.e. polytheism "evolved" out of monotheism http://history.stackexchange.com/questions/732/which-came-first-polytheism-or-monotheism

Science and belief in God are not mutually exclusive, as mentioned earlier, the fathers of modern science were believers and modern science was born in the Christian Western worldview. http://www.newscientist.com/special/god

 

[Frodo]

I go by what my sense tell me in these cases.

My knowledge of religions is simple - first there was animism, where everything was some kind of spirit or supernatural deity, we even used them to describe thunder, and lightning, and rain, and attributed them to gods, or the heavens' anger. Today, we know then as weather, and there are many factors contributing to them. They are not caused by emotions of the gods. Sicknesses and illness are caused by infections, nervous/organ malfunctions, not my spirit possessions.

Yes, science and religion are not mutually exclusive, the more we learn, the more mysteries are opened up. At this point, all I can say is we are still learning. The only difference is that science keeps us looking, searching, and learning more. Religion tells us to accept what the elders tell us.

Throughout our history, there are various beliefs, discoveries, and our understanding depends on how we interpret them; sometimes we get it right, sometimes we don't.

Cheers!

But you are not explaining WHY people are religious to begin with, even if your view of religion is granted for the sake of argument.

And since this is God's world, then God is very much involved in the universe, including establishing the laws of nature to work as they should and do today. So lightning can be explained by certain natural processes, but such processes follows the laws of nature set by God. And God can direct such processes to His purposes as He sees fit. So I won't rule out that God can send rain and lightning by using the laws of nature He has set. For example, the Bible says God sent an East wind to blow across the waters during Noah's Flood. And yes, many sicknesses are caused by bacteria or viruses, but there are also maladies caused by evil spirits. The only way you can rule them out is by first believing in naturalism as a worldview.

You heard of scientism? That is the religion of science, where people will only believe what scientists can tell them, it's not much different really. But as you noted, science is constantly being revised as new knowledge unfolds. But God knows everything, His knowledge is not being revised. The Bible is not in variance with established and undisputed facts of science. What the Bible reveals about the world around us is not contradicted by science.

 

[Agoraphobic]

Early people turned to religion to help in understanding nature and our surroundings. We've learned more as we explore them, diminishing the need to rely on religion, which we had to appease by sacrifices to the gods. We have broken out of that cage.

Whether it is "God's" world or not, it is up to the individual. The way I see it, our future is up to us, collectively. Life and Death will always remain a mystery to us. In this, religion gives us hope.

No. Only heard of it (scientism) when I read your post. I can accept what you said - that God knows everything. But we have to find those things out for ourselves. He(she/it?) gave us a mind to learn, discover, invent to improve our lives. Where it will lead us, we are still discovering.

Cheers!

But you are not explaining WHY people are religious to begin with, even if your view of religion is granted for the sake of argument.

And since this is God's world, then God is very much involved in the universe, including establishing the laws of nature to work as they should and do today. So lightning can be explained by certain natural processes, but such processes follows the laws of nature set by God. And God can direct such processes to His purposes as He sees fit. So I won't rule out that God can send rain and lightning by using the laws of nature He has set. For example, the Bible says God sent an East wind to blow across the waters during Noah's Flood. And yes, many sicknesses are caused by bacteria or viruses, but there are also maladies caused by evil spirits. The only way you can rule them out is by first believing in naturalism as a worldview.

You heard of scientism? That is the religion of science, where people will only believe what scientists can tell them, it's not much different really. But as you noted, science is constantly being revised as new knowledge unfolds. But God knows everything, His knowledge is not being revised. The Bible is not in variance with established and undisputed facts of science. What the Bible reveals about the world around us is not contradicted by science.

 

[Frodo]

Early people turned to religion to help in understanding nature and our surroundings. We've learned more as we explore them, diminishing the need to rely on religion, which we had to appease by sacrifices to the gods. We have broken out of that cage.

Whether it is "God's" world or not, it is up to the individual. The way I see it, our future is up to us, collectively. Life and Death will always remain a mystery to us. In this, religion gives us hope.

No. Only heard of it (scientism) when I read your post. I can accept what you said - that God knows everything. But we have to find those things out for ourselves. He(she/it?) gave us a mind to learn, discover, invent to improve our lives. Where it will lead us, we are still discovering.

Cheers!

You hold to a God of the gaps argument, that science will remove the need for God to explain things. But this is mistaken. Because the things being explained themselves beg an explanation, and the things that can't be explained by any natural causes will certainly mean that God is a highly explanatory cause. In fact, for some things the more we know about the gaps the more we need to invoke God. That for instance the discovery of DNA, which was what led noted atheist professor Anthony Flew to finally conclude there is a God. The more we discover the world of DNA the more it speaks of information and intelligence, a supreme Mind. Indeed God has given us minds to think and reason, and to use it to discover the world around us. Consider how God brought the animals to Adam so he could give them names.

 

[Kinanna]

Early people turned to religion to help in understanding nature and our surroundings. We've learned more as we explore them, diminishing the need to rely on religion, which we had to appease by sacrifices to the gods. We have broken out of that cage.

Whether it is "God's" world or not, it is up to the individual. The way I see it, our future is up to us, collectively. Life and Death will always remain a mystery to us. In this, religion gives us hope.

No. Only heard of it (scientism) when I read your post. I can accept what you said - that God knows everything. But we have to find those things out for ourselves. He(she/it?) gave us a mind to learn, discover, invent to improve our lives. Where it will lead us, we are still discovering.

Cheers![/
In the end We will all know. . By then it may be too late for some. ESP those who say there are more than one God or God Almighty is manifested in three or three hundred and sixty million.

 

[Agoraphobic]

Fren, just wish to make clear where I stand - that is we are still discovering. And we cannot rely on this "belief" in god that god is father-like, takes good care of his children, and leave "him" to work things out, because "he's" not around anymore. Whoever, this "god" is - we are still discovering. The god told to us by the Bible is a story for the ancients to believe (or at least those from the middle-east.) Whoever this Anthony Flew is and what he "concluded" is only because he came to a dead-end. And God didn't bring the animals to Adam, they were around on this planet long before Adam's ancestors descended from the trees, that is assuming the human biped evolved from some tree-climbing primate; not created by some god from nothing.

Cheers!

You hold to a God of the gaps argument, that science will remove the need for God to explain things. But this is mistaken. Because the things being explained themselves beg an explanation, and the things that can't be explained by any natural causes will certainly mean that God is a highly explanatory cause. In fact, for some things the more we know about the gaps the more we need to invoke God. That for instance the discovery of DNA, which was what led noted atheist professor Anthony Flew to finally conclude there is a God. The more we discover the world of DNA the more it speaks of information and intelligence, a supreme Mind. Indeed God has given us minds to think and reason, and to use it to discover the world around us. Consider how God brought the animals to Adam so he could give them names.

 

[Agoraphobic]

I do not know what we will know in the end. I just want to be a cosmic warrior at the end of days.

Cheers!

..............In the end We will all know. . By then it may be too late for some. ESP those who say there are more than one God or God Almighty is manifested in three or three hundred and sixty million.

 

[Frodo]

Fren, just wish to make clear where I stand - that is we are still discovering. And we cannot rely on this "belief" in god that god is father-like, takes good care of his children, and leave "him" to work things out, because "he's" not around anymore. Whoever, this "god" is - we are still discovering. The god told to us by the Bible is a story for the ancients to believe (or at least those from the middle-east.) Whoever this Anthony Flew is and what he "concluded" is only because he came to a dead-end. And God didn't bring the animals to Adam, they were around on this planet long before Adam's ancestors descended from the trees, that is assuming the human biped evolved from some tree-climbing primate; not created by some god from nothing.

Cheers!

You mentioned that we are still discovering. But have you thought about WHY we can even be discovering anything at all? Again all our thought processes, the functions of the brain, the laws of logic, the laws of nature, the order in the universe, all this points to an intelligent designer. And why would you conclude that God is not there, or assume that He did not communicate to us at all? Saying the Bible is just a story for people to believe, that's just a dismissive claim without any support whatsoever. Of course if that's just your opinion we can leave it as that. But I would certainly challenge that claim you made about the Bible being just a concocted fiction story. I mean, think about it, who can orchestrate a story of 66 books that takes at least 1500 years to write, using more than 40 writers, over 3 continents, and in 3 languages? If it is a story, then I say God must be the story teller, and it is HIStory.

What do you mean when you say Anthony Flew came to a dead end? I think he went to where the evidence in the end pointed to, design not chance.

The Bible said that God brought the animals to Adam. Of course this contradicts the assumed evolution story of man evolving from some ape-ish ancestor. But the evolution story is even more miraculous than the creation account of origins. At least there is a God who created the universe over 6 days. But evolutionists have to believe the universe made itself from nothing which is irrational, illogical, and impossible.

 

[Frodo]

I do not know what we will know in the end. I just want to be a cosmic warrior at the end of days.

Cheers!

I believe God has already told us the end about 2000 years ago.

 

[Agoraphobic]

We are still discovering because it never ends. We learned to form glass out of silica, then formed lenses, then crafted microscopes, then learned about bacteria. One thing leads to another. With each advancement, new doors to further opportunities are opened. That's the way things work. Even if your God taught everything there is to learn at Day One, our minds would not have developed sufficiently to absorb everything there is to learn. If you wish to believe that God made the earth in seven days, no one is stopping you, but you shouldn't impose that on others, it is their choice what they feel comfortable with too.

Fren, we will be going round and round in circles. If you accept the Bible as the book of truth, that's up to you. Me, I take it as a collection of records by ancient scribes who wrote down what was verbally handed down in their time, as a guide, a starting point. Whether it is truth or not, other supporting evidences will need to be revealed first. I choose not to worship it.

Cheers!

You mentioned that we are still discovering. But have you thought about WHY we can even be discovering anything at all? Again all our thought processes, the functions of the brain, the laws of logic, the laws of nature, the order in the universe, all this points to an intelligent designer. And why would you conclude that God is not there, or assume that He did not communicate to us at all? Saying the Bible is just a story for people to believe, that's just a dismissive claim without any support whatsoever. Of course if that's just your opinion we can leave it as that. But I would certainly challenge that claim you made about the Bible being just a concocted fiction story. I mean, think about it, who can orchestrate a story of 66 books that takes at least 1500 years to write, using more than 40 writers, over 3 continents, and in 3 languages? If it is a story, then I say God must be the story teller, and it is HIStory.

What do you mean when you say Anthony Flew came to a dead end? I think he went to where the evidence in the end pointed to, design not chance.

The Bible said that God brought the animals to Adam. Of course this contradicts the assumed evolution story of man evolving from some ape-ish ancestor. But the evolution story is even more miraculous than the creation account of origins. At least there is a God who created the universe over 6 days. But evolutionists have to believe the universe made itself from nothing which is irrational, illogical, and impossible.

 

[Agoraphobic]

And that Jesus Christ will appear again, this time in glory from the heavens?

Fren, I believe that Jesus already came a second time. The first time in a story during the time of Caesar, the second time, he came to us. Some chose to accept him, others rejected.

Cheers!

I believe God has already told us the end about 2000 years ago.

 

[Frodo]

We are still discovering because it never ends. We learned to form glass out of silica, then formed lenses, then crafted microscopes, then learned about bacteria. One thing leads to another. With each advancement, new doors to further opportunities are opened. That's the way things work. Even if your God taught everything there is to learn at Day One, our minds would not have developed sufficiently to absorb everything there is to learn. If you wish to believe that God made the earth in seven days, no one is stopping you, but you shouldn't impose that on others, it is their choice what they feel comfortable with too.

Fren, we will be going round and round in circles. If you accept the Bible as the book of truth, that's up to you. Me, I take it as a collection of records by ancient scribes who wrote down what was verbally handed down in their time, as a guide, a starting point. Whether it is truth or not, other supporting evidences will need to be revealed first. I choose not to worship it.

Cheers!

You have sidestepped the point I was making. That we are still discovering things is not the issue, that we are still learning more about God's world is not the issue. The point I made was that it is worth thinking about the fact that we can even think. Why is it that we can think? What accounts for our rational faculties? God did not create Adam and Eve as preprogrammed robots, but certainly they came designed with inbuilt "software" that can be exercised and developed as they interact with their created environment.

No, I don't believe God created the world in 7 days, so I am not imposing that on anyone. Neither am I imposing the truth that God created the universe in 6 days on anyone. I am sharing that view, which is not the same as imposing which is an emotionally-charged word to use that does not truly reflect what is going on here.