RootsBooster Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 The proof of the pudding is in the eating ? Has man fared well or not by rejecting Gods rulership ? Do you even think about what you're writing before you type it? I notice you haven't answered any of the questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lottiecass Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 Do you even think about what you're writing before you type it? I notice you haven't answered any of the questions. He is doing what all religious do,dodging and quoting the babble.Mankind would be more advanced if it never had religions,the unchanging brake on progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 Romans5:12. (The cause ) That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because they had all sinned We are in sin due to Adam rejecting Gods sovereignty (right to rule) There is no such thing as original sin as Adam and Eve, according to the Bible, were punished for their transgressions. Sin also does not apply to those other faiths who are not Christian. BTW I though Jesus died for the sins of man anyway? As for taking in blood, this OLD Testament text explains a great deal: Leviticus 17:10-14: " Any Israelite or any alien living among them who eats any blood—I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people. For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life. Therefore I say to the Israelites, "None of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood." " 'Any Israelite or any alien living among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth, because the life of every creature is its blood. That is why I have said to the Israelites, "You must not eat the blood of any creature, because the life of every creature is its blood; anyone who eats it must be cut off." No mention of blood transfusions as the did not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 He is doing what all religious do,dodging and quoting the babble.Mankind would be more advanced if it never had religions,the unchanging brake on progress. LOL. You may want to brush up on your history. Religion played a huge part in advancement of science. Even your earliest universities were mostly founded by religions, particularly Christian and Muslim. I guess your statement that 'mankind would be more advanced if it never had religions' may not have gone down well with the likes of Kepler, Galileo, and Newton, all of whom were extremely devout Christians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lottiecass Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 LOL. You may want to brush up on your history. Religion played a huge part in advancement of science. Even your earliest universities were mostly founded by religions, particularly Christian and Muslim. I guess your statement that 'mankind would be more advanced if it never had religions' may not have gone down well with the likes of Kepler, Galileo, and Newton, all of whom were extremely devout Christians. You may want to brush up on yours,Galileo was tried for his discovery because it conflicted with religion.Perhaps the earliest universities would have flourished quicker without religion involved,look how quickly things are moving in science in the last 50yrs.You might find if you look most scientists are not religious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 LOL. You may want to brush up on your history. Religion played a huge part in advancement of science. In some cases it didn't have the desired outcome though especially when it came to Dinosaurs and fossil evidence. A big surge by Christians and scientists to get fossils evidence to try to disprove Darwin on the origin of species backfired. The idea was to back up God account of creation but unfortunately for them their efforts backfired and they ended up confirming Darwin even more. Even despite that evidence creationists still believe that Dinosaurs didn't exist and that fossils were put there by the Devil to trick us. Jehova witnesses though believe that God created Dinosaurs around six to twenty thousand years ago, despite all evidence to the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perplexed Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 LOL. You may want to brush up on your history. Religion played a huge part in advancement of science. Even your earliest universities were mostly founded by religions, particularly Christian and Muslim. I guess your statement that 'mankind would be more advanced if it never had religions' may not have gone down well with the likes of Kepler, Galileo, and Newton, all of whom were extremely devout Christians. At a time when being an atheist could be bad for one's career advancement... There may well have been individual Christians who've advanced science. Think how much further they may have gone without the superstitious nonsense to hold them back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdom Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 In some cases it didn't have the desired outcome though especially when it came to Dinosaurs and fossil evidence. A big surge by Christians and scientists to get fossils evidence to try to disprove Darwin on the origin of species backfired. The idea was to back up God account of creation but unfortunately for them their efforts backfired and they ended up confirming Darwin even more. Even despite that evidence creationists still believe that Dinosaurs didn't exist and that fossils were put there by the Devil to trick us. Jehova witnesses though believe that God created Dinosaurs around six to twenty thousand years ago, despite all evidence to the contrary. Where you get that info from ? ---------- Post added 26-11-2015 at 11:22 ---------- There is no such thing as original sin as Adam and Eve, according to the Bible, were punished for their transgressions. Sin also does not apply to those other faiths who are not Christian. BTW I though Jesus died for the sins of man anyway? As for taking in blood, this OLD Testament text explains a great deal: Leviticus 17:10-14: " Any Israelite or any alien living among them who eats any blood—I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people. For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life. Therefore I say to the Israelites, "None of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood." " 'Any Israelite or any alien living among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth, because the life of every creature is its blood. That is why I have said to the Israelites, "You must not eat the blood of any creature, because the life of every creature is its blood; anyone who eats it must be cut off." No mention of blood transfusions as the did not exist. Well yes that's obvious lol So how's abstain apply today ? The word moves with the times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 So how's abstain apply today ? The word moves with the times ...yet it's only applied since 1945? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 I think we can all see that a logical, reasoned argument about religion is a little pointless. Fun to eat popcorn to though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts