Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

[_ Old Earth _] The Builder will Eventually Return

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00

John

Member
The Builder will Eventually Return
Parables are stories about familiar things which illustrate a deeper meaning. The following parable has its roots in modern man’s search for the origin of life.
In an isolated jungle lived a tribe of primitive people with no knowledge of the world outside their village. They had never been in contact with any modern technology and lived in constant struggle with other tribal groups. One day as members of the tribe were hunting in unknown territory, they stumbled upon the wreckage of a crashed airplane. Approaching the plane with caution they touched the metal surface and ran their hands over the smooth glass of the cockpit window. As they ran back to the village to report the find to the village elders many questions ran through their minds. Where could this huge structure have come from? A debate over the origin of this strange object soon raged - had the gods sent it to them as a sign? The village polarized into opposing viewpoints.
One opinion was that the object was built by humans. After all, the skeletal remains of several humans were found within the decaying structure. Others believed the object must have had a natural origin. To believe it was created by other humans would acknowledge an intelligence surpassing their own.
Those believing that the airplane was designed and built by other intelligent humans argued that this was obvious, but could not prove how, why, or when. All attempts to explain how, why, or when, which were not based on a belief in random natural processes, were severely ridiculed. The tribal elders believed that all of the knowledge needed to explain the world around them was in the possession of their tribal counsel and any attempt to persuade them otherwise was met with severe punishment. The first group soon became silent.
Those believing in the natural origin of the object strengthened their argument by showing that the same rubber-like substance found in the tires could be found oozing from trees. Likewise, a substance similar to the glass could be found on beaches where lightning had struck the sand. The paint and fluids in the structure could also be shown to occur naturally. By throwing one of the screws into the air with just the right spinning motion and catching it in just the right hole, the screw would even partially spin into place.
Amongst themselves they agreed that, given enough time, the structure could have built itself (although the exact mechanism was not yet known).
Even more convincing evidence was forthcoming as the deteriorating airplane was repaired and the parts rearranged. Since the natives eventually understood so much about the structure, this was accepted as proof that the plane had built itself. A project was even started to map, catalogue, and understand every piece of the structure. All of these observations confirmed to the primitive natives that they had been correct in their understanding of the natural origin of the object.
Those stubborn few who continued to believe the object was created by other intelligent people were considered backward and ignorant. They were ignored, and village schools were organized so that all of the children would be taught only the naturalistic “scientific†explanation.
Within several generations, there was no longer any dissension because everyone now knew that random processes had produced the wrecked airplane. So the mystery was solved ... until the builder of the airplane returned.
 
A false analogy unless you believe that we were created by humans. The difference is that we know humans exist, so imagining them as the creator of an airplane is legitimate. We don't know that God exists.

edited at least 24 hours later.
Are you even going to try and defend you're story, or admit that it doesn't properly demonstrate the point you are trying to make, or are you just going to pollute the forum with unoriginal threads and then leave them to rot?
 
We can determine the design methods and techniques of a human designer, since we have other humans to compare to; we know what purposes humans construct for, what tools they can do it with, what forms their designs take on and in what order, the design process.
This is incomparable to the design methods of an omnipotent, omniscient, perfect being who is supposedly not just designing everything in the universe but the universe's rules itself. How do we detect the design of a being when we have no idea how such a being would design and have nothing we can compare it to?
 
freeway01 said:
Nice post John... well thought out... :-D I agree with you 100%
It's not his post, he's copying someone else's argument.
 
freeway01 said:
Nice post John... well thought out... :-D I agree with you 100%
DId you even read the other posts? The logic in John's post is so obviosusy fallacious.
 
first off yes..I did.. second... nice post john.... third... the analogy is not that we are created by human, no far from it.. It's about how "non christians" are trying to prove that we where not created by a creator, and that one day went the creator returns..( Like it or not He will ) and those that say there is no God.. well, God says it best... " A FOOL in his heart has said there is no God" :sad
 
freeway01 said:
first off yes..I did.. second... nice post john.... third... the analogy is not that we are created by human, no far from it.. It's about how "non christians" are trying to prove that we where not created by a creator, and that one day went the creator returns..( Like it or not He will ) and those that say there is no God.. well, God says it best... " A FOOL in his heart has said there is no God" :sad

A fool in his heart speaks for Him as well.
 
Jayls5 said:
A fool in his heart speaks for Him as well.

someday we will all know, everyone will stand before the creator of the universe... saying its not so wont change it..
 
freeway01 said:
first off yes..I did.. second... nice post john.... third... the analogy is not that we are created by human, no far from it.. It's about how "non christians" are trying to prove that we where not created by a creator, and that one day went the creator returns..( Like it or not He will ) and those that say there is no God.. well, God says it best... " A FOOL in his heart has said there is no God" :sad
Did you just use the bible as evidence for the bible?
 
freeway01 said:
Jayls5 said:
A fool in his heart speaks for Him as well.

someday we will all know, everyone will stand before the creator of the universe... saying its not so wont change it..
Only if you are right, which you are not. Once you die you're wormfood. Sorry bud. We aren't going to "know" anything after we die.
 
proponent said:
freeway01 said:
Jayls5 said:
A fool in his heart speaks for Him as well.

someday we will all know, everyone will stand before the creator of the universe... saying its not so wont change it..
Only if you are right, which you are not. Once you die you're wormfood. Sorry bud. We aren't going to "know" anything after we die.


Yes my body is "wormfood"

Read up bud.
 
johnmuise said:
proponent said:
freeway01 said:
someday we will all know, everyone will stand before the creator of the universe... saying its not so wont change it..
Only if you are right, which you are not. Once you die you're wormfood. Sorry bud. We aren't going to "know" anything after we die.


Yes my body is "wormfood"

Read up bud.
Believing consciousness can live on after the wreck of the brain is like believing 60 mph can live on after the wreck of a speeding car.
 
johnmuise said:
Its like trying to explain 3D to a 2D figure, they (you) just won't understand.

If we are assuming the 2D spacial entity acts under the medium of time, you could do a graphical representation (or many) to show it what 3D meant. This is in the same sense that we can graphically show our "4 dimensional" minds how extra dimensions would work through analogy, graphs, math etc.

Except in your analogy, we know nothing of this "other dimension" (God/Soul) and you cannot describe what it really means.
 
johnmuise said:
Its like trying to explain 3D to a 2D figure, they (you) just won't understand.
With a little brainwork I can comprehend four and five dimensions. Just as 3D figures are displayed on 2D surfaces like paper and computer monitors, 4D and up constructs can be represented similarly. There is nothing inherently incomprehensible about them; they aren't something we're used to but they're something we can grasp with effort, just like anything else.
 
johnmuise said:
Its like trying to explain 3D to a 2D figure, they (you) just won't understand.

John is talking spiritual things and you are trying to turn it into scientific things,,

Ephesians 6:12
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.
 
johnmuise said:
Parables are stories about familiar things which illustrate a deeper meaning. The following parable has its roots in modern man’s search for the origin of life.
Right.

johnmuise said:
In an isolated jungle lived a tribe of primitive people with no knowledge of the world outside their village. They had never been in contact with any modern technology and lived in constant struggle with other tribal groups. One day as members of the tribe were hunting in unknown territory, they stumbled upon the wreckage of a crashed airplane. Approaching the plane with caution they touched the metal surface and ran their hands over the smooth glass of the cockpit window. As they ran back to the village to report the find to the village elders many questions ran through their minds. Where could this huge structure have come from? A debate over the origin of this strange object soon raged - had the gods sent it to them as a sign? The village polarized into opposing viewpoints.
Right.

johnmuise said:
One opinion was that the object was built by humans. After all, the skeletal remains of several humans were found within the decaying structure. Others believed the object must have had a natural origin. To believe it was created by other humans would acknowledge an intelligence surpassing their own.
Right.

johnmuise said:
Those believing that the airplane was designed and built by other intelligent humans argued that this was obvious, but could not prove how, why, or when. All attempts to explain how, why, or when, which were not based on a belief in random natural processes, were severely ridiculed. The tribal elders believed that all of the knowledge needed to explain the world around them was in the possession of their tribal counsel and any attempt to persuade them otherwise was met with severe punishment. The first group soon became silent.
Those believing in the natural origin of the object strengthened their argument by showing that the same rubber-like substance found in the tires could be found oozing from trees. Likewise, a substance similar to the glass could be found on beaches where lightning had struck the sand. The paint and fluids in the structure could also be shown to occur naturally. By throwing one of the screws into the air with just the right spinning motion and catching it in just the right hole, the screw would even partially spin into place.
LOL

Okay, so now I think I can see attempted comparisons with what you think is the current status of the academic community. The problem is however is all that your analogy demonstrates is that ignorance is not form of evidence. An inability to understand something does not constitute a good analysis when looking at it. The tribe in your example simply were ignorant about it. We know, from experience where planes come from due to experience with planes. We know the origins of planes. We do not know the origins of life and have no reason to presume it was created by any specific intelligent being, so your example is moot.
 

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00
Back
Top