Uttermost Off Road
- Thread starter uttermost
- Start date
RedHeep
NAXJA #1499
- Location
- Landenberg, PA
I read some of this, skipped a lot of it, mulled it over and this is what I came up with:
You guys need to get laid. Quickly. It's like a bunch of 14 yr old virgins in here talking about who saw who in the girl's locker room. Grow up, get over it.
You guys need to get laid. Quickly. It's like a bunch of 14 yr old virgins in here talking about who saw who in the girl's locker room. Grow up, get over it.
- Location
- Aransas Pass, Texas
RedHeapOjeep said:
And with that post, we welcome you to our esteemed virgin group. You should fit right in. :shhh:
westsacxj
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- west sacramento
bottom line is you either believe or you dont. I am a christan. I dont go around preaching to everyone I know or meet. I will share my beliefs but dont not in anyway push my beliefs on others or tell them they are going to hell if they dont change their ways. Now to start telling someone that they are weak,dumb, or ignorant and putting down their beliefs is just down right disrspectfull and childish. This thread is not a discusion its a bashing. Real good disusions can not be had on a forum they need to be in person.
Now as far as facts go, there are many facts to prove all kinds of stuff. Even when there are facts lots of people still wont believe. So spitting out a bunch of proof and facts really isnt going to do anything if someone doesnt have an open mind. That is just the stubborness that mankind has.
Now as far as facts go, there are many facts to prove all kinds of stuff. Even when there are facts lots of people still wont believe. So spitting out a bunch of proof and facts really isnt going to do anything if someone doesnt have an open mind. That is just the stubborness that mankind has.
WB9YZU
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Madison, WI
uttermost said:
Good Luck with the endevor ! Blending your interests is a great idea
I suspect that if you want to find God (or help others do so), in Nature would be the place to find him.
I wheeled a few times with a fellow in Englewood who helped form an Off-Roading Church Group. Good times and a nice fellow to hang with.
Yes, I have read the threads <yawn>; too bad that. Bad form all around. All sides have shown a level of dissrespect for each others views not normally found on this Forum.
Must be Monday
JohnJohn
Member #42
- Location
- Austin, Texas
Fergie said:
Today you don't (May 1st)
Last edited:
glfredrick
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Louisville, KY
Are you guys having fun? You're arguing amongst yourselves and sounding like a bunch of 12 year olds at that.
Let's get back to the discussion... A couple things were said while I was out at work that I 'd like to respond to.
1) Yes, I know EXACTLY what a pagan is, but there are multiple definitions of the word. You can be a Pagan -- one who worships the elements in a pre-Christian way, earth, wind, fire, water, plus a few scattered whatever's like Pan, etc. Closely related to Wicca, but not exactly the same deal. Or, you can be a pagan -- one who lives like he is the only thing that matters, also called nihilist, and a couple of other phrases. Generally an unbeliever and perhaps forceful in that unbelief (why -- I'll never know. You defeat your own arguments when you think that you have something to say when what you say is that what we say doesn't exist -- how's that for a mind-bender?).
2) There is a lot of evidence that we live in a universe that was Intelligently Designed. How exactly that works out is still up for debate, but the evidence is in. Its called "anthropic principles" and there are a BUNCH of them that are causing a lot of cosmologists and other scientists to re-think some widely held tenets that otherwise are believed in and of themselves by faith.
Before you go off on the above statement, I ask you to show PROOF that there could possibly be multiple universes, or perhaps an easier one -- what is the "dark matter" that fills the universe? Certainly those should be easy questions to answer, seeing as how so many "scientists" and other atheistic naturalists hold to them as the core of their belief for how we arrived.
In fact, science is almost bancrupt at this stage of the game, and is looking outside planet earth for causes of the evolutionary spark. That's in part what all the excitement is about the Mars probe, etc. There is a desperate search to find something alive outside our planet that could possibly have seeded this planet, and thus explain how and why we got here -- including, but not limited to how DNA, RNA, and even protien molecules formed. Please don't cite the Miller-Urey experiments -- they were dismal failures and were discredited by the scientific community (but not the textbooks we use to educate our children!) shortly after they were annouced.
The truth of "science" is that we have been unable to replicate the building blocks of life in any meaningful way, even with $$$ spent in the billions to do so. Of course, the answer to that is, as always, "not yet..." But how long will we have to wait? Miller-Urey was in the late 50's -- yes, over 50 years ago, and still no progress... Meanwhile, other evidence points solidly toward a universe with a beginning, and the critters within it replicating according to their kinds -- just like the Bible said.
3) How old is the earth? Who really knows? Science doesn't. The church doesn't. The Bible doesn't. A couple of folks have tried to figure it out -- both scientists and theologians, but so far, I've seen no solidly firm number. Archbishop Usher tried to calculate all the things that happened in the Bible, and compared them to the events of history to try to come up with a timeline. He was sort of successful -- as far as the historical record could carry him, but I'd have to say that he missed the dating of the Earth wildly -- it is NOT 6000 years old, so you can drop that argument as well. AS far as science is concerned, the number changes almost every day. Oh, they round it off into a couple billion years here and there, but the truth is that they are merely extrapolating based on current conditions and evidence, with NO sure knowledge that things were ALWAYS the same. How could we know that they were? We were not there, and have no sure way of measuring such things, so any guess is just that, a guess.
I favor a "young earth" creation event, but I generally refuse to place a date on it. What I do know is that civilized humankind seems to begin somewhere around 10,000 years in the Fertile Cresent (exactly where the Bible places the beginning of mankind!). I also know that if we gathered ALL of the bones of early humans and placed them in one place at one time, they would barely fill a modern coffin... Hardly enough to go on to make the wild predictions that are being made. Bet they didn't tell you that in science class.
I can go on some about origins from both sides of the debate, but I'll leave that stand there and go on to the next point...
4) Ways of "knowing." From many of the posts, especially the silly post with the graph, you would think that there is only one possible way of knowing anything. I guess the school system got to you guys... How can we "know" anything or something? By observation, certainly -- as far as our observation is accurate, repeatable, and verifiable, which we all know isn't always true.
What about by "testimony?" That is certainly the way that every court in the land comes to "know" the facts in a trial, so it HAS to be a valid way of knowing, yet in discussions like this, it seems to get set by the wayside, even while most of you are using THAT as your argument. Think about it -- you are SAYING (testifying) that YOU know something based on what you have experienced. YOU know it is true becasue it happened to YOU. THAT is testimonial evidence, and it is not to be taken lightly, so IF that is your tactic in debate, you also must allow the other side to use the same tactic -- and the Christian is testifying that God exists, has changed their lives, and is real -- by evidences in their life that cannot be shown in any other fashion.
There are other ways of knowing based on reason and philosophy -- reasoning out an equation concerning some thing or another. If A is B and if B is C, then A must also be C, and the like. This is perhaps the surest way of knowing anything, and it is the basis for the scientific method, yet, this way of knowing is also discounted in this debate. In fact, one of the surest "laws" of the universe is the law of non-contradiction. Square cannot be round. Roung cannot be triangle. To say that square is round, or that round is triangle is to contradict oneself. Aristotle was the first to publish a work about this law. He said: "one cannot say of something that it is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time." The law of non-contradiction stipulates that there IS a truth and that there is something that is not true, for you cannot hold two things of the same nature, yet opposite in thought to both be true at once -- even if weak-minded persons do so all the time in their personal belief systems.
Many of you who are posting your stuff against the Christian position are violating the law of non-contradiction, the use of testimony, and also the use of systematic observation to arrive at the truth. In other words, you are striking out, and it shows...
Let's get back to the discussion... A couple things were said while I was out at work that I 'd like to respond to.
1) Yes, I know EXACTLY what a pagan is, but there are multiple definitions of the word. You can be a Pagan -- one who worships the elements in a pre-Christian way, earth, wind, fire, water, plus a few scattered whatever's like Pan, etc. Closely related to Wicca, but not exactly the same deal. Or, you can be a pagan -- one who lives like he is the only thing that matters, also called nihilist, and a couple of other phrases. Generally an unbeliever and perhaps forceful in that unbelief (why -- I'll never know. You defeat your own arguments when you think that you have something to say when what you say is that what we say doesn't exist -- how's that for a mind-bender?).
2) There is a lot of evidence that we live in a universe that was Intelligently Designed. How exactly that works out is still up for debate, but the evidence is in. Its called "anthropic principles" and there are a BUNCH of them that are causing a lot of cosmologists and other scientists to re-think some widely held tenets that otherwise are believed in and of themselves by faith.
Before you go off on the above statement, I ask you to show PROOF that there could possibly be multiple universes, or perhaps an easier one -- what is the "dark matter" that fills the universe? Certainly those should be easy questions to answer, seeing as how so many "scientists" and other atheistic naturalists hold to them as the core of their belief for how we arrived.
In fact, science is almost bancrupt at this stage of the game, and is looking outside planet earth for causes of the evolutionary spark. That's in part what all the excitement is about the Mars probe, etc. There is a desperate search to find something alive outside our planet that could possibly have seeded this planet, and thus explain how and why we got here -- including, but not limited to how DNA, RNA, and even protien molecules formed. Please don't cite the Miller-Urey experiments -- they were dismal failures and were discredited by the scientific community (but not the textbooks we use to educate our children!) shortly after they were annouced.
The truth of "science" is that we have been unable to replicate the building blocks of life in any meaningful way, even with $$$ spent in the billions to do so. Of course, the answer to that is, as always, "not yet..." But how long will we have to wait? Miller-Urey was in the late 50's -- yes, over 50 years ago, and still no progress... Meanwhile, other evidence points solidly toward a universe with a beginning, and the critters within it replicating according to their kinds -- just like the Bible said.
3) How old is the earth? Who really knows? Science doesn't. The church doesn't. The Bible doesn't. A couple of folks have tried to figure it out -- both scientists and theologians, but so far, I've seen no solidly firm number. Archbishop Usher tried to calculate all the things that happened in the Bible, and compared them to the events of history to try to come up with a timeline. He was sort of successful -- as far as the historical record could carry him, but I'd have to say that he missed the dating of the Earth wildly -- it is NOT 6000 years old, so you can drop that argument as well. AS far as science is concerned, the number changes almost every day. Oh, they round it off into a couple billion years here and there, but the truth is that they are merely extrapolating based on current conditions and evidence, with NO sure knowledge that things were ALWAYS the same. How could we know that they were? We were not there, and have no sure way of measuring such things, so any guess is just that, a guess.
I favor a "young earth" creation event, but I generally refuse to place a date on it. What I do know is that civilized humankind seems to begin somewhere around 10,000 years in the Fertile Cresent (exactly where the Bible places the beginning of mankind!). I also know that if we gathered ALL of the bones of early humans and placed them in one place at one time, they would barely fill a modern coffin... Hardly enough to go on to make the wild predictions that are being made. Bet they didn't tell you that in science class.
I can go on some about origins from both sides of the debate, but I'll leave that stand there and go on to the next point...
4) Ways of "knowing." From many of the posts, especially the silly post with the graph, you would think that there is only one possible way of knowing anything. I guess the school system got to you guys... How can we "know" anything or something? By observation, certainly -- as far as our observation is accurate, repeatable, and verifiable, which we all know isn't always true.
What about by "testimony?" That is certainly the way that every court in the land comes to "know" the facts in a trial, so it HAS to be a valid way of knowing, yet in discussions like this, it seems to get set by the wayside, even while most of you are using THAT as your argument. Think about it -- you are SAYING (testifying) that YOU know something based on what you have experienced. YOU know it is true becasue it happened to YOU. THAT is testimonial evidence, and it is not to be taken lightly, so IF that is your tactic in debate, you also must allow the other side to use the same tactic -- and the Christian is testifying that God exists, has changed their lives, and is real -- by evidences in their life that cannot be shown in any other fashion.
There are other ways of knowing based on reason and philosophy -- reasoning out an equation concerning some thing or another. If A is B and if B is C, then A must also be C, and the like. This is perhaps the surest way of knowing anything, and it is the basis for the scientific method, yet, this way of knowing is also discounted in this debate. In fact, one of the surest "laws" of the universe is the law of non-contradiction. Square cannot be round. Roung cannot be triangle. To say that square is round, or that round is triangle is to contradict oneself. Aristotle was the first to publish a work about this law. He said: "one cannot say of something that it is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time." The law of non-contradiction stipulates that there IS a truth and that there is something that is not true, for you cannot hold two things of the same nature, yet opposite in thought to both be true at once -- even if weak-minded persons do so all the time in their personal belief systems.
Many of you who are posting your stuff against the Christian position are violating the law of non-contradiction, the use of testimony, and also the use of systematic observation to arrive at the truth. In other words, you are striking out, and it shows...
IXNAYXJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Wherever the next race is.
Another intentionally "silly" post for you.
-----Matt-----
-----Matt-----
IXNAYXJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Wherever the next race is.
glfredrick said:
I Testify that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is indeed the Creater. And how dare you call my graph silly! That is one of the prime tenets of the Pastafarian Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I hope you see the error of your ways and repent.
RAmen,
-----Matt-----
glfredrick
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Louisville, KY
Fergie said:
First, of course I do -- and WILLINGLY. You claim to be able to know how to live a great life apart from a study of religion and the Bible. I would ask you to please explain how it is that you have come to know what a good life IS apart from religious morality. I think that you would have a VERY difficult time explaining that, and here's why.
Even though YOU PERSONALLY do not hold to the tenets of the Bible and the Christian faith, you live in a land that has been founded on those principles for generations, if not centuries! Many of our customs, mannerisms, cultural norms, etc., that you learned from observing society at work are based in the exact principles that you claim to hate. You just cannot escape the fact that we, here in America, are a culture based in the Judeo-Christian worldview. Almost every aspect of our nation is from these principles. The names of our towns are biblical names. The names of our children are biblical names. That is fact, and it cannot be so easily set aside. So, more than you know, and more than you like, you are already operating in a biblical workdview. Of course, you are also trying to distance yourself FROM that worldview, but society keeps on dragging you back in, with all their moral and ethical rules, don't they...
Second, I would ask you how it is that you can know ANYTHING about God without His revelation? Of course, we can learn SOME things about God from observing His creation (which you likely deny, but you are living in it at any rate, and it HAS made a difference in the way you think about things).
Christian theologians suggest that God has revealed Himself in three ways -- first, through the created order. The ORIGINAL modern scientists were Christians (look it up). They believed that they could discern the mind of God by observing His orderly creation -- and they did. We now base almost all of our understanding of our physical universe on their laws and proposals -- modified as we've learned more, yes, but the same laws, nonetheless.
The second way that God has reavealed Himself is through persons. He is a God of faith -- and thus "unprovable" by scientific means. God will NEVER be proven the way that some of you insist that He be proven, yet millions testify that He exists, operates in our world, and in our lives. Yes, I know that millions can be wrong, but in this case, the evidence is strong to suggest that they are not. There are simply too many cases of "divine intervention" to dismiss them lightly. God IS at work in and though His people, every day in so many ways as to be utterly astounding once one grasps the implications of that fact. Part of this "revelation" are the prophets, and Jesus, who came to earth fully human, while setting aside none of His Godhood.
The third way is through the revelation of the Word of God -- the Bible. This written record was penned over a span of 1500 (yes 1500) years, by 45 authors, on three continents, in three languages, by farmers, kings, fishermen, doctors, slaves, politicians, tax collecters, sons of a carpenter, and others. It is in two halves -- the Old Testament and the New Testament.
The OT is the story of God, working out His plan to send a Messiah -- including filling us in on why He was/is needed. In the OT, many prophecies were made concerning the coming Messiah -- all fulfilled in detail in the NT. Note that some of the claims to a "loose" canon of the OT and NT are not true. The OT was already translated from Hebrew into Greek in the 3rd century BC in Alexandria, Egypt in a version called the Septuigint. It is often abbreviated the LXX version. It predated Jesus by at least 250 years, and contained ALL of the prophecies concerning His coming, even the town in which He would be born (Bethlehem). The OT is divided up into four parts -- the Torah (the Law of Moses -- first 5 books), the history of Israel (partly contained in the Law), the poetry and wisdom sections (Psalms, Proverbs, The Song of Songs, etc.), and the prohets, both "major" and "minor" (not for content, but for length).
The NT is the fulfillment of the OT. It does not displace it, nor does it refute it -- it answers it and completes it. It is the story of what happened after that 600 year silence from God between the OT and NT times. It contains the four "Gospels," Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, each written to a different audience, for a different purpose, but together fleshing out the earthly life of Jesus. Luke, a physician, historian, and disciple wrote both the Gospel with his name, and also the Acts of the Apostles -- what happened after Jesus ascended into heaven. He took careful pains to be historically accurate and many a scholar have indicated that Luke was a marvel in the ancient world for his astounding accuracy. He told us of the travels, the trials, the growth of the church into Asia Minor and Europe, and also about the demise of several of the orignial Apostles of Jesus. Paul writes the middle section of the NT, and comprises the bulk of the writings with his "epistles" (letters) to the churches that he founded or cared for. Other writers also wrote epistles (John, Peter, Jude, James, and Hebrews, author unknown, but supposed by many to be Apollos), and then the Revelation, which was penned by John, and which showed the church the future events planned by God, some of which have yet to come to pass.
In NO PLACE has a defined prophecy of the Bible been disproven. Especially in the life of Christ. It is historically accurate, where it speaks of the things of this world it is also scientifically accurate (but not written in scientific language, nor is it a science text book as some have tried to make it). For instance, centuries before we ever sent a deep-sea diving sub to the rift in the bottom of the ocean, the Bible state that the waters of the deep came up from under the earth, from cracks in the ocean floor. The Bible also stated (roughly 4500 years ago -- at the time of the building of the Egyptian pyramids) that the FIRST act of creation was light. Our modern scientists totally agree. Photons were the first thing that came about in the Big Bang -- so say ALL. How did Moses, who wrote the book of Genesis know those things except that God reveal them to him?
Why do I follow it? Becasue it is TRUTH. I have spent an inordinate amount of time researching and studying the claims of Scripture in both English and in the original languages (Yes, I read both Hebrew and Greek -- Aramaic is but a few chapters here and there in Daniel and Jeremiah, and I have not had the need to learn it for them). I have UTTER confidence in the Bible as a factual historical document -- that I also believe was inspired by God. I have more, if you like on the Bible. We have barely scratched the surface...
quote=Fergie]My basic philosophy is:
Whether you believe in God or not, live a good life. If you do believe in God, have the realization that you will fail, that you will screw up, and in the end, God will know whether you lived well or not. Accept everyone as Christ did, and show the world through your actions, not your words, that you can have a good life with God.[/quote]
But, how do you KNOW that you are living a life pleasing to God without some reference as to what it is that God is looking for? Making up one's own religion, however sincere one is, is a disaster in the making. That is exactly how cults are formed, and exactly how the church in past centures strayed into committing the sins of the Inquisiton, etc. There is no hope once a person is divorced from the Bible, for any wind will change you and blow you here and there. No, I prefer the solid anchor of Scripture -- verified and true. THAT tells me what the "good life" is -- without guessing, or getting it wrong as so many have.
BTW, you have sevearl times spoken of the "good life." Care to share what that is? Where you came up with it? You wouldn't be borrowing from that book you claim to dislike so much, now would you? Trying to live the "golden rule," for instance?
Fergie said:
Sometimes -- but what gives you (living shallowly yourself) the right to scrutinize others? Do you not have enough problems of your own to take care of? How about you get some help from others -- wouldn't that be a better way? That is the biblical way -- we are created for relationship and community -- that's partially why we tend to hang out on forums like this. We are looking for relationship and community. That is what the Bible and the church offers -- and that is partly what Jesus died to accomplish!
I know the teachings of Maslow... He wrote the heirarchy of needs. There is not a word that he wrote that goes against the Bible, BTW. We ARE to feed, care for, cloth, and raise up our families -- and ourselves. We ARE to develop human relationships to satisfy human needs. Are some churchy folk shallow? Sure -- but so too are some agnostics and atheists that only pick that route of belief becasue they are pissed at God...
Fergie said:
We can "leave it alone" but even you have a difficult time doing that, as we've all seen. At least I'm trying to share truth in a way that just presents the facts, and I'm perfectly comforable in letting you and others make their own decision about what to do with what I've shared.
Just so you know -- so too did Jesus. He let people walk away from Him whenever they wanted to. He has yet to drag a person kicking and screaming into His kingdom.
Next...
Ludakris
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Frederick, Maryland
assgas: uke: :angel: uke:
Ludakris
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Frederick, Maryland
JohnJohn said:
Nice...
Hey Zues Christos!!
glfredrick
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Louisville, KY
IXNAYXJ said:
Ok -- I'll bite... Let's get out the shovels and start doing some digs. We ought to be able to find some factual, historical evidence to coincide with the testimonial evidence -- right? Also, do you have collaborating witnesses? Can I cross-examine the witness to see if he is mentally fit?
glfredrick
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Louisville, KY
TRNDRVR said:
Only if it is a "Long Black Train..."
- Location
- Aransas Pass, Texas
TRNDRVR said:
Nope, bad idea. Some people would try, get lost, and then need to be found. One would think that would be difficult in a rig that does not turn.... but I can imagine a few around here could manage to get lost........
glfredrick
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Louisville, KY
TRNDRVR said:
Its been fun -- really. I do this for many reasons, and partly because I get to learn as well.
If you are ever in the Kentucky area and you want to try some of our wheeling, drop us a line. Love to ride with you. I'm sure the conversation would be stimulating.
