- Joined
- 21 February 2010
- Posts
- 55
- Reactions
- 0
Mr J - I don't know if there is intelligent extraterrestial life out there or not.
But to be honest, whether there is extraterrestial life out there or not is irrelevent to me personally because Genesis tells us that God created the universe and everything in it and so the existence or non-existence of extraterrestial life does not affect my belief in God.
Now hopefully, you will take a few minutes to answer the question I posed to the forum earlier:
"What do you believe will be life after death if life goes on at all?"
Our situation might be comparable to a colony of ants in a lab worshipping a scientist.
Do you see the inconsistency then? You don't know if there's intelligent life, but you're certain there is a god. Even if you feel far more strongly about God since you think the Bible is evidence, how can you be sure? Is your faith really based on certainty, rather than a choice to believe despite a lack of concrete evidence?
You mean spiritual life after death but did not state that. Spirit is observable during life but not observable after death. Belief in such is just that, belief, but why belief? Why not deal with the reality? The answer will be 'prove there is not spiritual life after death' . Case dismissed on grounds of no evidence.
No, I don't see any inconsistency at all.
The Bible (Book of Genesis) says God created the universe and everything in it, which IMO would include any extraterrestials if they exist.
Personally, it makes no difference to my beliefs if ET's exist or not since there existence or non-existence does not affect my belief in God. I have already commented twice on why I believe the Bible to be true.
One of the reasons I believe the Bible to be correct is the very close similarities between the predictions of the prophets in the Old Testament and the accounting of the actual events in the New Testament. The main examples of this I can give are the reasonably detailed descriptions of the birth of Jesus Christ, the miracles He worked during His life and his death and resurrection by the prophet Isaiah and the fairly similar accounts of those events in the 4 Gospels.
No, I don't see any inconsistency at all.
The Bible (Book of Genesis) says God created the universe and everything in it, which IMO would include any extraterrestials if they exist.
Personally, it makes no difference to my beliefs if ET's exist or not since there existence or non-existence does not affect my belief in God. I have already commented twice on why I believe the Bible to be true.
You mention that if ETs existed it would be mentioned in the Bible,....
I intentionally mentioned existence outside of the universe.
You mention that if ETs existed it would be mentioned in the Bible, but that if they are shown to exist it wouldn't change your belief in God (and I assume the credibility of the bible). Why not? If your evidence for God is the Bible, and the Bible is shown to miss something you believe it couldn't have missed if it were true, then how can you not question your belief when the credibility of your primary evidence is destroyed? It sounds like your faith is based on something other than the Bible, and you're just using it as is convenient.
Am back, cant help myself.
Good points, but yesterday I put up a post which clearly shows that Matthew"s story is at direct odds with Luke's story in the bible but our ole pal buldozer just kept rolling on.
If you feel your post conclusively proves Matthew's Gospel is sufficently at odds with Luke's Gospel to the point where it conclusively proves God does not exist, then why not take your post to the media and see if it will stand up to their scrutiny.
If it does, I am sure they will offer you mega $'s to publish your post.
IMO your post would not stand up to their scrutiny.
What I posted was a direct quote from Richard Dawkins and it has, and it does and after initial attacks at his cridibility, which also stood up, they the theologians have become quiet; if you are unable to prove your point, do not stir the hornets nest.
Richard Dawkins is entitled to his opinions just like anyone else. If Richard Dawkins had conclusive proof that God does not exist, I am sure at least the media would be all over it one way or the other.
I have to go out for a while. If I can I will pop back this evening if you would like to discuss further
Most media is controlled by religious interests, judaism and scientology in particluar. Media deliberately ignore if they can the rationale of thinkers like Dawkins.
And on God, the issue is not that he does not exist, because in truth we do not know, the real issue is proving that he does exist Just feeling or believing or reading it in the bible does not prove any sort of real existence. You say I know he exists, please tell me why you know he exists?
Hi Roland - I'll quickly summarise what I have commented earlier.
The reasons I believe in God include my belief that the overall messages and teachings in the Bible are the Word of God and to be correct.
One of the reasons I believe the Bible to be correct is the very close similarities between the predictions of the prophets in the Old Testament and the accounting of the actual events in the New Testament. The main examples of this I can give are the reasonably detailed descriptions of the birth of Jesus Christ, the miracles He worked during His life and his death and resurrection by the prophet Isaiah and the fairly similar accounts of those events in the 4 Gospels.
Most media is controlled by religious interests, judaism and scientology in particluar. Media deliberately ignore if they can the rationale of thinkers like Dawkins.
And on God, the issue is not that he does not exist, because in truth we do not know, the real issue is proving that he does exist Just feeling or believing or reading it in the bible does not prove any sort of real existence. You say I know he exists, please tell me why you know he exists?
I have consistently commented we should all decide individually whether we choose to believe in God or not based on whatever evidence or non-evidence is acceptable to each one of us.
So you believe regardless of any evidence and by your statement would still believe when there is no evidence, ie ..."non-evidence"...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?