BTW...can scientists make dirt? Rats, maybe, well I guess deformed or faulty rats, but can they make dirt? In the lab they can take inanimate concoctions and make then alive, but can they make dirt out of nothing? Fair question and means nothing more than, can they make dirt out of nothing? Just questions..........please don't put me back on the rack again.....I promise I won't say anything else!

That's sarcasim, and innocent questions.

Are you big enough to just lighten up? Or will you go on another tirade about my religion, lack therof, or everything you or others might want to tear to verbal shreds that you can get your hands on?

I think what I have written in the last two posts is either light hearted humor and or trying to lighten up things a bit. But I guess that isn't someting that can be done in this particular forum?

Sighhhhhhh

Kerry-O;

Okay, I'll take this one on:

"Just my opinion, but scientists and engineers have done more for the human race in the last 100 years than priests and their ilk have done in the previous 5000. Life in the Middle Ages, when religion, hand in hand with monarchs ruled by this One God's largesse? Anyone? Yes? No?

I didn't think so."

Of course the premise you are asking me to accept here is that the priests and their ilk over the previous 5000 years have been true representatives of God. Since we know from scripture they they were NOT (Jesus refering to them as hypocrites doers it for me) then where does that leave us. Second point - are we to assume that Scientists and engineers attribute what they have done to their own abilities? Look closely at the list of discoveries that have benefited man-kind injust the last century and you will find that a majority of them are/were (for those no longer with us) believers - attributing their discoveries to the providence of their Lord. So what you are actually saying is that God has done more for man-kind in the last 100 years than those that have claimed to serve him over the last 5000. So - think what you want, it's all a matter of perspective.

lj

Thank you Ejay: very well put!

Creationsfire,

You *are* posting in a thread entitled "What being agnostic means to me" and you did pose a line of argument that sounded suspiciously like "My God can beat up Your God" and "Can your God do this!?!". I thought my response was well measured given the context and the circumstances that you threw down the gauntlet (your profile does list you as a Christian, right?). And I certainly didn't employ any namecalling or insults, did I?

I don't see the problem. It's hardly *my* fault that I am, as you say, "more well read". I provided counterpoints and examples, something scientists do all the time. I hardly think that's cause to demand that I 'lighten up'. If you don't want an agnostic's serious viewpoint, then why, pray tell, are you here?

Oh, BTW-- the point about scientists making deformed rats? If you contend that God made made me, why did I end up with congential anomalies that have almost killed me three times? And it sure wasn't priests practicing religious rites over me that have come as close to curing me as is currently possible, but rather the scientists at Johns Hopkins and some engineers over in Sweden.

-Kerry O.

Agnostic means to me that it was all here by the time I got here. I can't prove to someone else that there is a God or there isn't a God. In the military they had put down on my two honorable discharges from the Army and the Air Force that I gave marginal performance and I was untrainable. I had one mother who was a holy roller and one father who was athiest. I got to be a yoyo between the two. One of my uncles was an agnostic and he was fun to be with. He questioned everything and some of his insights helped me by the time I got to rehab. It made it easier to get rid of a lot of misinformation so I could get new information and be reprogrammed. The programming still works wonderful, today.

Eljay,

When The Black Death swept Europe, claiming upwards of 2/3rds of the population, many of the survivors became understandibly cynical about religion, especially the Roman Catholic Church. The clergy were, after all, ad you put it, representatives of God. But they were as powerless as the commoners to explain or combat the disease. Some Christians even took to slaughtering Jews, looking, however superstitiously as it seems now, for scapegoats to appease God.

How scientific was all of this? And why did God allow this?

You write:

"Second point - are we to assume that Scientists and engineers attribute what they have done to their own abilities?"

Yes, in fact, 'we' are. I find this attitude from and by religionists particularly irksome personally, but it was the sweat off my brow over any number of high tech instruments and long nights studying mind numbing texts that got me where I am today. I hate it when you folks just appropriate others' hard work and call it God's. So yes, thankyewverymuch, I will think what I want in this regard no matter how much it offends your religion.

There's another flaw in your logic, intentional or otherwise: I specifically said _priests_, not laymen. Priests are definitely believers, laymen are usually believers, scientist may or may not be. But it doesn't follow that all scientists who make discoveries or invent things are priests.

And I'm not even going to go into Popes owning slaves....

-Kerry O.

Kerry-O;

"When The Black Death swept Europe, claiming upwards of 2/3rds of the population, many of the survivors became understandibly cynical about religion, especially the Roman Catholic Church. The clergy were, after all, ad you put it, representatives of God. But they were as powerless as the commoners to explain or combat the disease. Some Christians even took to slaughtering Jews, looking, however superstitiously as it seems now, for scapegoats to appease God.

How scientific was all of this? And why did God allow this?

*** I would have trouble with calling anyone who slaughters Jews as a solution to combatting disease "Christian". So I think we are likely crossed in our semantics on defining just what a "Christian" is. To me - you are what you do, not what you call yourself, or think you are. At some point or another all pass away. To a Christian - this is a time when you are called to give account of your life. I cannot explain why God allows people to pass away from the plaque, a crazy dictator, a natural disaste, or peacefully in their sleep. To us - we qualify a death as being good or bad, that God should somehow allow everyone to accomplish everything they's ever hoped for in life - in perfect health, and when we've had enough - go to sleep and wake up in heaven. I don't know why life isn't this way? Neither of us does. All we know - is for some it is, others it isn't. But according to what the bible says (The word of God) "It is the soul who sins who will die", and "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". So what are we to expect? The simple answer to your question - is that the punishment for sin is death - and it was their time. That's why God allowed it.

You write:

"Second point - are we to assume that Scientists and engineers attribute what they have done to their own abilities?"

Yes, in fact, 'we' are. I find this attitude from and by religionists particularly irksome personally, but it was the sweat off my brow over any number of high tech instruments and long nights studying mind numbing texts that got me where I am today. I hate it when you folks just appropriate others' hard work and call it God's. So yes, thankyewverymuch, I will think what I want in this regard no matter how much it offends your religion.
*** I don't call the hard work you've put into your profession "God's work". He actually had nothing much to do with those choices you made. He might have had something to do with bringing about the people necessary to further your educational endeavors, making the opportunities you had availble to you possible in the first place. You had no choices in the matter of who your early mentors were - and what you may call "being in the right place at the right time" I call something else. But I would never belittle the effort or choices you've made to get you where you are now. And I admire and respect the work you've put into your education. It's impresive, and your arguments are well thought out and thought provocing. But I will stay with my point that numerous scientists give God a lot more credit than people realize for the opportunities and circumstances that have allowed them to make those discoveries that benefit man kind - whereas I get the impression from you that God couldn't possibly have been involved because those scientists worked hard. That's illogical. I did NOT say that God did the work while they took the credit. Far from it.

There's another flaw in your logic, intentional or otherwise: I specifically said _priests_, not laymen. Priests are definitely believers, laymen are usually believers, scientist may or may not be. But it doesn't follow that all scientists who make discoveries or invent things are priests.
*** But I find that premice unacceptable. I come out of the Catholic church at a time when the laymen WERE the Christians - NOT the priests. I belonged to one of the parishes in Massachusetts where one of the worst pedifiles in our countries history was bounced around from parish to parish by Cardinal Law without as much as a rebuke about what he was doing. Here again - just because one is a priest - I do not consider that "automatic membership" to being a Christian. So where you may see all priests as "Christian" I do not. I think there are more scientists who are Christians, that there are priests who are.

And I'm not even going to go into Popes owning slaves....
*** What makes you think the Pope is a Christian?

lj

Eljay, are you by any chance insinuating that the definition of a Christian should be based on something other than the individuals professed faith?

A Christian is someone who repents (of their unbelief) confesses that Jesus is Lord, and believes that God raised Him from the dead. Having done this - one is filled with the Holy Spirit - sealing them for eternity and eternal life in heaven with God the father and God the son. Merely thinking one is a Christian because they have a good heart and do good things does not make it so - for one does not receive the Holy Spirit by doing good works.

So, splain how the Pope is not a Christian. As I said, I seem to be excessively dense tonight.

Is there no other way for one to be filled with the Holy Spirit? Doesn't God still get to judge whether that "Christian" is what they claim to be? You're making it sound like a "go through the motions and yeah, buddy, you're in" kind of thing.

I'm beginning to understand why some people taken offense when they are referred to as Christians.

I think we should do a "Search and Replace" of the word "Christian" with the phrase "people who call themselves Christian" for -every- occurrence in this thread, and while the remaining text might not be as strongly stated as some would like, we'd reach near-unanimity of agreement on the almost the entire thread.

Not that agreement is so desirable, but that focusing other areas of disagreement may be more fruitful.

Wench;

"So, splain how the Pope is not a Christian. As I said, I seem to be excessively dense tonight."
*** I didn't say the Pope wasn't a Christian - I simply asked Kerry-O how he knew he was. Most people "assume" because an individual is a member of a "generally understood as Christian" group that it qualifies them to be a Christian. But if one claims to be a Christian - and then states that they do not believe that Jesus is God, they are contradicting themselves, and creating doubt as to whether they are in fact what they are claiming to be.

"Is there no other way for one to be filled with the Holy Spirit? Doesn't God still get to judge whether that "Christian" is what they claim to be? You're making it sound like a "go through the motions and yeah, buddy, you're in" kind of thing."
*** Actually, I'm saying that just "going through the motions and then claiming you are now a Christian and filled with the Holy Spirit" will likely NOT "get you in". Only God knows the heart, and it is He who fills us with the Holy Spirit. It's not something we can do for ourselves. As to any other way to be filled with the Holy Spirit - I wouldn't know where in the bible to tell you to look to get a different answer than the one I gave - so I would say - No, there is no other way. Without believing in Christ as who he claims to be - there's no other way to recieve the Holy Spirit.

I realized a Christian was one who believes in Christ and what he taught. I seriously didn't know you had to believe God and Jesus are one and the same, which is what I'm understanding at this point. I'm not trying to be argumentative, Mass, I'm trying to get a true definition of the word.

Actually, there are several definitions of Christian in Wikipedia, which appear to be related to who's actually saying the word and which meaning they place on it.

u see guys
most of u like to play with words
for me is very simple God will judge all of us regardless if we are christians or not.
God will see our heart and not what we say we are.

Wench;

I determine the meaning of "Christian" to be that which comes from the bible - rather than one that comes from religion.

I always think the most simple of definitions to understand come from the Gospel of John. The first verse says In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. From verse 14 thru 18 - we know that the Word was Jesus. So there's the Father - who is God, and there is the Son - who is the Word - who is also God. So it is two individuals (as it were) who are God here - they are not one in the same, just the same nature - which is God. The Holy Spirit is also God - thus the concept of the triune God. In chapter 3, Jesus tells Nicodemus that no one can see the Kingdom of heaven unless he (they) are born again. In chapter 5 he furthers describes this concept to the disciples from verse 16 thru 47.

I wuv you LW.
KAT

Actually LW, God does not judge anyone, it is Jesus who is the judge. John 5: 22

Yup. Jesus will sit on the throne and judge us all. He alone.
Kat