Religion & Spirituality - 1 January 2007

Then God said, "Let us make humankindc in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth,d and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

God had help creating mankind? And what does God mean by "our image" and "our likeness"? Hmmmm?

2007-01-01 12:21:23 · 22 answers · asked by Russ J 1

2007-01-01 12:20:31 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous

Why do people think that Esther from the holy bible is black?

2007-01-01 12:19:57 · 2 answers · asked by Angel06 2

Examples like

http://www.godisimaginary.com

or

http://www.allaboutworldview.org


So, evidence cannot solve things if there is so much contrary evidence.

Is this G-d saying "I will decide who comes to me and who doesn't" ??

Is this just an issue of the heart?

I believe its a heart thing. We all think open minds are wonderful. I feel faith comes from an open heart. You either have one or you don't.

And for the record, I love atheists and other faiths. G-d desires them more than He desires me. Fellow Christians, don't mock the potential next generation of repentant hearts! If love is not on it, stay silent.

So....should we just can all the "evidence" ??

Blessings to all for a wonderful 2007.
David T

2007-01-01 12:16:29 · 16 answers · asked by ? 4

2007-01-01 12:14:46 · 12 answers · asked by jomi 4

why when i ask "who was the first Muslim?" everone gives a different answer. some say Adam, some say Muhammed. which one is it.

the Koran states that Moses, Muhammed and Adam were all the first to become Muslim.

how is that possible. if it is from Allah then there would be no contradictions right?

2007-01-01 12:13:50 · 10 answers · asked by ? 4

I have come to realise something here whilst i read Q&As. I believe as a christian in tolerating other peoples religions. To me, it looks like some of you dont. If i mention Judaism, everyone is all smiles and thinks happy thoughts. However, when i mention Islam, everyone turns those smiles into anger. Do you people not realise that the biased media have made you think what they want. Why does Sky news show us one sided views whilst other channels like Al jazeera show us another. You need to look at both sides cos you otherwise get half the story.
I believe tolerance of all faiths is the way forward including atheism. Do you agree

2007-01-01 12:12:57 · 31 answers · asked by Chad M 1

what I want to know exactly the verse that said if you leave by the Sword you die by Sword, does this mean that if you kill someone you can expect to die. where is the verse I know Jesus said it. before he was crusified. when he was arressted and this is what he said to peter. so can you tell me what the verse means and where it is. Although I forgive what he did so just need to know though what the bible saids about the death penalty. I also need to know even though we forgive him what God saids? What are you thoughts you got any ideas.

2007-01-01 12:11:09 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous

Matt.7:13,14 Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.

2007-01-01 12:10:48 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

A) Give all the money to your chuch/synogague/mosque etc.
B) Give all the money to charities of your choosing
C) Keep part of the money and give the rest to people you love
D) Keep all the money for yourself as you're the one who bought the ticket
E) None of the Above - "Your own answer"

2007-01-01 12:10:29 · 6 answers · asked by Yggdrasil 1

Agnostics take a lot of crap around here from believers and Atheists alike. You want to say we are just scared to commit one way or the other, which is UNTRUE. A lot of Athiests are also Agnostic, and a lot of Believers are as well. Here is my question: What undeniable, physical proof do you have that God exists or doesn't? You must have some, right? Else that would mean that you know the existence of God, or lack there of, is unprovable (and that would make you *GASP* an Agnostic). (sorry for my anger, it is only directed at Agnostic bashers, but EVERYONE is welcome to answer)


Posted this question 2x before, and it never showed up, sorry if you get a repeat.

2007-01-01 12:10:18 · 30 answers · asked by Amanda D 3

is it true that the Koran claims different people as being the first Muslim? since you have the Koran memorised this should be a easy question.

2007-01-01 12:08:20 · 18 answers · asked by ? 4

2007-01-01 12:08:04 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-01-01 12:07:44 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

At least three different Saint Valentines, all of them martyrs, are mentioned in the early martyrologies under date of 14 February. One is described as a priest at Rome, another as bishop of Interamna (modern Terni), and these two seem both to have suffered in the second half of the third century and to have been buried on the Flaminian Way, but at different distances from the city. In William of Malmesbury's time what was known to the ancients as the Flaminian Gate of Rome and is now the Porta del Popolo, was called the Gate of St. Valentine. The name seems to have been taken from a small church dedicated to the saint which was in the immediate neighborhood. Of both these St. Valentines some sort of Acta are preserved but they are of relatively late date and of no historical value. Of the third Saint Valentine, who suffered in Africa with a number of companions, nothing further is known.

2007-01-01 12:06:33 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

If so then what do you do in the following situation:

It is 1944 and you are a resident of Amsterdam. You are hiding a Jewish family in your attic. The Nazi's come to the door and ask you if you have seen the family that you are hiding.

Should you tell the truth or is there such a thing as moral relativism?

2007-01-01 12:06:30 · 16 answers · asked by mullah robertson 4

if the relgions dont except that jehovah sent jesus to save them according to john 8:42-47 shouldnt we all try to save as many as we can since we have the knowledge of john 3:16?

2007-01-01 12:06:27 · 3 answers · asked by gary d 4

We did not come from monkeys. My degree was science/chemistry. Some scientist believe this junk theology...but many do not! It's a theory....in other words...an idea which has never been proven or disproven...therefore it remains a theory.

Now a few examples of why I do not believe this theory:

Any animal that has evolved does not remain....yet the monkey is still with us...the average day monkey has not evolved into a man!

I believe many animals have adapted to their environment and thus their features change to meet their surrounding needs...thus adaptation! However, to evolve into something totally more advance such as monkey into man would mean that the monkey would no longer exist because man would take his place...why does the monkey still exist????

The same can be said for apes and all other animals someone could possibly say man evolved from! Why do they all still exist today?



Charles Darwin was a very smart man. His adaptation theory is quite genius and his studies were revolutionary and also opened the eyes of the scientific community...however his evolution theory lacks common sense from such a pioneer!

Even if you disagree with the above...how do you explain how any life began on earth? Life cannot just spring up...and Mathematically, it is inconceivable that anything as complex as a protein, let alone a living cell or a human, could spring up by chance.

Consider the following:

Nobody has ever seen a new species evolve.

Evolutionists cannot point to any transitional fossils--creatures that are half reptile and half bird, for instance. Where are all the transitional species. Really there should be a continuous line of transitional species, in the order of 1000's of times more numerous than obviously distinct species, and yet we have a clumps of very distinct species. And no transitional forms....

Recent discoveries prove that even at the microscopic level, life has a quality of complexity that could not have come about through evolution.

Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

1st law of thermodynamics states the energy(in this case life) cannot be created or destroyed! In other words life cannot just form...some form of energy must have been present! This is not a theory, it's a law.

Law of biogenesis. People once believed that maggots were spontaneously generated from the flesh of dead animals. They thought life could come from non-life. Louis Pasteur proved beyond doubt that life cannot arise from non-life. This is not a scientific theory, but a law. Proponents of evolution contend that life did arise spontaneously from non-life at least once in the past, in other words, that this particular natural law was broken or nonexistent sometime in the past. Again this cannot happen as energy cannot be created or destroyed!!!

Darwin himself wrote:If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.

Darwin wrote:To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.

The ability to fly supposedly evolved spontaneously by chance at least four times: for insects, birds, mammals (bats) and reptiles. Yet intelligent man did not figure out the principles of flight until the past century.

Many of what Darwin considered to be transitional species have been discredited. Even Archaeopteryx, once thought to be transitional between reptiles and birds, is not. Modern birds have been found deeper in the fossil record. For the most part nature's divisions are not blurred and indistinct, currently or in the fossil record. The phyla appear in the fossil record almost instantaneously in what is known as the Cambrian explosion, with no apparent connections.

Evolution teaches that fish evolved from lower animals. How did they get fins? No evolutionist claims that fins came in one generation, but rather in many generations. In other words, the development of fins was a GRADUAL development. And from where did birds get their wings? No evolutionist claims that wings came in one generation, but rather in many generations. They claim that the development of wings was through a very slow, gradual process. Now when the process, let us say, was half way complete, the "fin" or the "wing," as the case may be, would be useless — good for nothing — for a fish cannot swim with a part-fin nor can a bird fly with a part-wing! A part-fin or a part-wing, would be a monstrosity, not a perfect adaptation such as we see everywhere in nature. NOWHERE IN THE WORLD TODAY CAN ONE FIND PARTLY DEVELOPED APPENDAGES OR ORGANS, but, rather, everywhere there is perfect adaptation, perfect development for its intended purpose. That fact proves that EACH CREATURE, IN ALL ESSENTIAL FEATURES, HAS BEEN EXACTLY AS IT IS NOW, and was so created in the beginning.

Hugo de Vries aptly said, "Natural selection may explain the survival of the fittest, but it cannot explain the arrival of the fittest."

Science has proven that chaos does not naturally and normally turn into order. Life can only come from life (law of biogenesis). Things dont improve naturally as a matter of course (entropy). Things improve because of intelligent input. For example, the technology we enjoy in the present age is a result of human intelligence, not random chance. Science has given us a great deal, but not everything that exists can be explained scientifically.

Prof. Fleischman, modern zoologist of Erlangen after repudiating Darwinism, said, "The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination."

Dr. Clark (recognized as one of the world's greatest biologists) was biologist of the United States National Museum, he stated bluntly that Darwin, Lamarck and all their followers were wrong "on almost all vital points." "So far as concerns the major groups of animals, the creationists seem to have the better of the argument. There is not the slightest evidence that any of the major groups, arose from any other. Each is a special animal-complex. . . .Appearing as a distinct creation."

Prof. T. H. Morgan said, "Within the period of human history we do not know of a single instance of the transformation of one species into another." (p. 43. "Evolution and Adaptation;" McMillan, 1903).

Another thought: If there is not supreme being that created heaven and earth and all creatures, then explain how the Earth and world is so organized and designed for life? How did our planet adapt to us???? If the oxygen mixture were more than it is we would die...proof of this is hospitals in earlier years were giving a little too much to preemie babies....they died! In the rest of the universe both WATER and OXYGEN are very scarce; in fact, hydrogen and helium make up 99% of all matter in the universe, yet our earth is designed for life...unexplained or superior design????

There are scores of other "laws" in the universe that are perfect and necessary to make up this vast universe. All students of astronomy are familiar with Kepler's three laws of planetary motion. There are "laws" of motion, laws of heat, laws of light, laws of sound — and all are PERFECT, never-changing, never-failing. Rear Admiral D. V. Gallery (USN; writing in the Saturday Evening Post), said, "The stars. . . .in their orbits and velocities through the heavens faithfully obey a great code of LAW. Earth's scientists can quote and explain this code in great detail, until you ask, "Where came these laws?"

Edwin B. Frost, at one time astronomer with the Yerkes Observatory, wrote: "Everything that we learn from the observational point of view in the study of astronomy seems to me to point precisely and always toward a purposeful operation in nature. . . . "I cannot imagine planets getting together and deciding under what law they should operate. NOR DO WE FIND ANYWHERE IN THE SOLAR OR STELLAR SYSTEM THE DEBRIS THAT WOULD NECESSARILY ACCUMULATE IF THE UNIVERSE HAD BEEN OPERATING AT RANDOM. . . .

Proof that the Universe had a Beginning "to assume that the universe had no beginning . . . fails to account for the CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF RADIOACTIVITY." (Scientific American).

Animals breathe oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide; green plants (in sunlight) take in carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. Without plants in the world the time would soon come when all animals and all men would use up the available oxygen in the air and would perish." * Who designed such a complex system??? * "Give the plants a free hand and the water would in time become so alkaline as to destroy them. Give the animals a free hand and they, in the end, would be killed by the acidity they themselves produced; but the two working against one another insure the maintenance of conditions vital to both. All life is like that: a thousand interacting and balanced forces, like the flying buttresses of a towering Gothic Cathedral; destroy one and the whole graceful fabric comes down in irreparable ruin." (Creation's Amazing Architect).

Flowers supply bees with nectar; bees in turn transfer pollen from one flower to another, thus preserving the life of the species. HMMMM??? These species formed a treaty all on their own?????? Is this their own plan or of a superior design?

IF THE RELATIVE HUMIDITY AND THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE WERE INCREASED, THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT WOULD SOON BE RUINED BY MOLDS! Who keeps these in check???? By chance they sustain??? Not probable!!!

The atmosphere gives us a protective covering from the harmful effects of the ultra-violet rays from the sun. Dr. Florence E. Miller, scientist connected with the Smithsonian Institute, says that we live "miraculously" on this planet, protected from eight "killer rays" from the sun, by a thin layer of ozone high up in our atmosphere. "If that little belt of ozone, approximately forty miles up and only one-eighth of an inch thick (if compressed), should suddenly drift into space, all life on earth would perish." The whole subject of "ozone" in the air is so unusual, it seems almost incredible. "There are two kinds of ultra-violet rays — long and short. The long are deadly, and are absorbed and neutralized by that ozone belt. If permitted to come through, they would blnd and blister the human race, and would soon destroy all life on earth. The short violet rays, on the other hand, are necessary to life. If that belt of protective ozone were too thick, so that the short rays could not come through, we would all die of rickets. "the most deadly of the 'eight killers' comes through in quantities just sufficient to render great service, without destroying us. It keeps down the growth of green algae, one-celled plants that grow in streams. Unrestricted, they would multiply so rapidly that they would clog all the streams of the world, and lead to endless flooding of the world. On the other hand, it is fortunate for the earth as we know it that the algae were allowed to develop in moderation."

The earth is just THE RIGHT DISTANCE from the sun, relative to the amount of heat and light the sun pours into space. If the earth were much closer, it would be too hot; If it were much farther away, it would be too cold. Dr. William J. Humphreys, formerly with the United States weather bureau told the American Meteorological Society that if the average temperature of the earth were raised but two or three degrees "you could bid goodbye to all the big cities of the earth,"


Blind evolution is helpless to produce such endless intricacies of design and adaptation. Why - how -could chance evolution, by "random changes," produce an intricate, living, workable mechanism like the examples described above?

Our world was designed for us to live in...everything designed for a reason. The food chain for example is a complex design of energy passed on...who designed such a plan???

reproduction of new life is complex! Who designed such this plan?

All things organic and non organic were designed and have specific function in the universe! These did not randomly decide to do their part...it was a superior design created by a higher being!

2007-01-01 12:06:04 · 41 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-01-01 12:04:58 · 8 answers · asked by reba 1

Is it fair to say it was shank or be shanked in the bible?

2007-01-01 12:04:29 · 11 answers · asked by Capt. Kirk 1

Would it be wrong to interpret this as "I am not interested in the lack of evidence, or indeed in contrary evidence - I am going to believe what I want to believe anyway, however outlandish. I am going to believe it with extreme fervour and possibly even aggression, and moreover I am going to proclaim that it is a VIRTUE to believe something despite lacking any evidence to support it." ?

This seems a special kind of obstinacy to me. Do it if you want, but how can it be in any sense something to be proud of? Why aren't you defending such a preposterous position?

Just wondering.
_

2007-01-01 12:04:19 · 17 answers · asked by Bad Liberal 7

Is this biblical?

2007-01-01 12:03:25 · 6 answers · asked by Jasmine 5

Refer to my post under religion section "Can science really prove anything".

It is amazing how an atheist can stare something right in the face and still say it doesn't exist. You guys ask what I mean by evidence supporting creation, I list like 7 links, and then you still say there is no evidence. I bet yall don't even bother to follow links, you just state your opinion and move on...and it's us Christians who are just naive? Geesh...

2007-01-01 12:01:30 · 14 answers · asked by ? 4

I was told that they must show no emotion for 40 days?

2007-01-01 11:59:08 · 23 answers · asked by David O 1

He sets out laws for slavery. Whe did God not condemn it? Was slavery different before?

2007-01-01 11:57:24 · 19 answers · asked by sfumato1002 3

2007-01-01 11:56:22 · 10 answers · asked by schflng 2

What's it like? I plan to go to one next Sunday. I know they have the Missal in both English and Latin.

2007-01-01 11:54:36 · 6 answers · asked by ZORRO 3

Like, Inshallah, Alhamdullilah, and other phrases like that?

2007-01-01 11:53:40 · 7 answers · asked by Developing Love 3

Whose DNA did Jesus have?

1 No DNA (not possible)
2 His father's DNA (he didn't have a human father, so not possible)
3 His mother's DNA (not possible. That would make Mary and Jesus clones and, since they are different sexes, that's not possible. Alas, if Jesus was female, but he wasn't)
4 A combination of his father's and mother's DNA (not possible, see #2)
5 Some unique kind of DNA (after all, it was a miracle birth and God can do anything he wants)
6 Good question. Maybe virgin births are impossible after all and the DNA question is the reason why.

2007-01-01 11:53:37 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

As far as God being her saviour, God saved her at her conception by not allowing sin to ever touch her from time of her conception. This was so that she could be the mother of the Word of God made flesh. God would not be in the womb of a woman who was stained by sin, so He made it so that the Blessed Virgin Mary would be conceived without the stain of original sin. This is consistant with the ark of the Covenant in the Old Testament, only Mary is the ark of the New Convenant.

The angel Gabriel calls Mary by the title of "full of grace" of literally translated "one who has been made full of grace and always will be full of grace".

Mary says in the Bible that her SOUL magnifies God. No one else anywhere in the Bible ever makes such a bold statement about what God has done for them. She also says that God has done great THINGS for her. This is saying that God did more for her than just use her for giving birth to Jesus. In the Bible, Mary said all generations shall call her blessed.

2007-01-01 11:53:15 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous