# Innovational Inspiration



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

A discussion on another forum led to this topic, but it is more appropriate in this forum;

God is often given credit for providing man with the wisdom and inspiration for inventions, discoveries, advances in medicine, etc.  If it is God's will that mankind progress in this direction, how does that relate to God's response to the Tower of Babel and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?


----------



## atlashunter (May 19, 2011)

That's a bit of a softball pitch for the theists HJ.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 19, 2011)

A few thoughts...

Not sure on the inspiration for inventions part.  But God clearly is the author wisdom.

Many people are smart and not wise.

God will destroy that which goes against his will and bless that which doesn't.  That's probably making things too simple.  But you follow I'm sure.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

One example off the top of my head is space exploration.  The term "rocket science" is commonly associated with the type of intelligent innovation I'm speaking of.  Applying God's response to the Tower of Babel to our modern attempts at space exporation is not too far of a stretch, in my opinion.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 19, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> One example off the top of my head is space exploration.  The term "rocket science" is commonly associated with the type of intelligent innovation I'm speaking of.  Applying God's response to the Tower of Babel to our modern attempts at space exporation is not too far of a stretch, in my opinion.



Well...I think the space exploration program is shedding more light on our creator more than anything else.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 19, 2011)

Babel does not indicate that God does not want us to advance.  It simply shows that God does not want us to advance to our own glory.

We are designed and created for his glory only.  When we seek to acheive great things for our own glory, he will "disperse" us.  

I understand that that is not easily acceptable for people who don't believe in God.  But those are the facts from the Christian perspective.

So, no, God will not always thwart our efforts to do great things.  Motivation is a key component.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Babel does not indicate that God does not want us to advance.  It simply shows that God does not want us to advance to our own glory.
> 
> We are designed and created for his glory only.  When we seek to acheive great things for our own glory, he will "disperse" us.
> 
> ...



If what you say is correct, then it should be evident that a higher rate of success in the innovation behind space exploration can be attributed to Christian scientists who are seeking to glorify God than to athiest scientist who are seeking to glorify themselves.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 19, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If what you say is correct, then it should be evident that a higher rate of success in the innovation behind space exploration can be attributed to Christian scientists who are seeking to glorify God than to athiest scientist who are seeking to glorify themselves.



You fail to realize that God doesn't always use the godly to bring Himself glory.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> When we seek to acheive great things for our own glory, he will "disperse" us.
> 
> Motivation is a key component.



It's not about my understanding.  I was directly addressing what Hf said above.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 19, 2011)

Motivation is a KEY component....not the ONLY component.

I won't be so bold to tell you what God will and won't do in every circumstance.  There are things that I do not understand nor will I ever know (BTW, that's biblical and I'm ok with it.).

It's not as if things will only succeed if they are done for his glory.  In an "ultimately" sense, yes, things will only succeed that have been done for his glory.  What the Bible does tell us is that things done in his name and for his glory will be blessed.  But that does not translate into the statement that everything that is "successful" has been blessed or was done for his glory.

Genocides are "successful", serial killers are "successful", Bernie Maddof was "successful".  All these things are successes.  I suppose your timeframe makes a big difference as well, huh?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> What the Bible does tell us is that things done in his name and for his glory will be blessed.



What precisely does it mean for the efforts to be blessed of a scientist who is glorifying God?  Is there any measurable difference between a scientist's efforts that are blessed by God as opposed to a scientist's efforts that are not blessed by God?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 19, 2011)

Perhaps I should have said something more along the lines of people will be blessed for their efforts done for the glory of God.

Sit better?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Perhaps I should have said something more along the lines of people will be blessed for their efforts done for the glory of God.
> 
> Sit better?



So we've gone from God will destroy that which is against His will and is not done to glorify Him and God will bless that which is not against His will and is done for His glory, to there is no measurable difference?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 19, 2011)

If you read that somewhere, it was not in my post.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> If you read that somewhere, it was not in my post.



I guess I misunderstood.

So, to relate the Tower of Babel to modern space exploration, do you believe that God is a factor at all in the success or failure of the space program?


----------



## ambush80 (May 19, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> I guess I misunderstood.
> 
> So, to relate the Tower of Babel to modern space exploration, do you believe that God is a factor at all in the success or failure of the space program?



You're funny.....


----------



## Huntinfool (May 19, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> I guess I misunderstood.
> 
> So, to relate the Tower of Babel to modern space exploration, do you believe that God is a factor at all in the success or failure of the space program?



God is a factor in the success or failure of every program.


Ever heard the song "He's got the whole world....in his hands"?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> God is a factor in the success or failure of every program.
> 
> 
> Ever heard the song "He's got the whole world....in his hands"?



So, do you believe that man could accomplish political unity and advanced construction projects all on their own without God providing the innovational inspiration for this?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 19, 2011)

I don't think even God could help us accomplish political unity!

But yes, man can accomplish many things without God providing the inspiration.  

He can also destroy those efforts if it serves his good purpose.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> I don't think even God could help us accomplish political unity!
> 
> But yes, man can accomplish many things without God providing the inspiration.
> 
> He can also destroy those efforts if it serves his good purpose.



Fair enough.

Based upon the two examples (The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and The Tower of Babel) is it reasonable to believe that God wants mankind to advance in knowledge, technology, etc?


----------



## atlashunter (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> He can also destroy those efforts if it serves his good purpose.



Sweet. Why doesn't he destroy the technology man possesses to produce chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 19, 2011)

I don't know. Am I required to?


----------



## atlashunter (May 19, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> I don't know. Am I required to?



No I was just curious. You seemed to know a lot up to this point. Perhaps you could ask him?


----------



## atlashunter (May 19, 2011)

Based on your explanation it looks like God's position (assuming the Tower of Babel is historical and not ancient myth) is as follows.

Tower of Babel: "Supernatural intervention required! Confound the people and scatter them across the earth!"

Weapons of Mass Destruction: "Meh. Free will. What's on tv tonight?"


----------



## 1gr8bldr (May 19, 2011)

You guys are holding the keys. Just have to figure out what they open. Huntingfool is correct. The main thing to note is that Eve wanted "to be like God". To create things, na, For the Glory attributed to him. She coveted his glory. It was not knowledge she wanted. The tower of babel is not about mans progression or advacement or modernization or inventions or...... It is about his "religious accomplishments". Self righteousness. Man builds his "temple" and stands back proudly and thinks what an accomplishment I have become. This man made tower must be torn down in disgust and be raised a new where God is the builder.


----------



## atlashunter (May 19, 2011)




----------



## JFS (May 19, 2011)

1gr8bldr said:


> Self righteousness. Man builds his "temple" and stands back proudly and thinks what an accomplishment I have become.



It is certainly worthy to maintain a sense of humility.  Hubris has its dangers.  But I would point you to the Titanic or Fukushima to make the point without resorting to silly distortions about the facts or patently false fable elements about the results.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

Let me be clear on this for you guys so that we're on the same page.  

I do not know everything about God or how he chooses to operate.  I never will and neither will anyone else.  The Word is very clear about that.  

What I CAN tell you about is what he has chosen to reveal through his Word...and that is sufficient.

All of our problems and disagreements (here on the forum) really boil down to the fact that you require of God (or any diety) that he explain himself to you and the he be fit into a box of "logical" steps in order for you to consider believing.

Imagine the arrogance of a child demanding a parent explain him/her self.

Imagine the arrogance of the created demanding that the creator explain himself and justify his holy and righteous decisions and actions.

I do not know why WMD's exist.  I do not know why every instance of pain or suffering is allowed to exist.  I'll be plain and honest about that.  

If I were to answer the WMD vs Babel question through my understanding I would tell you that part of it is that you're still missing the motivation issue.  

Babel was entirely about man being proud of what man can do.  It was entirely about bringing glory to mankind and had nothing to do with bringing glory to God.  One thing that we do know about his nature is that he's a jealous God and will not stand to be replaced...by a wooden idol or by man himself in a self-worshiping kind of way.

Time is another issue that you're not considering.  If God does not move fast enough to rectify and issue for you, you assume he's not moving at all.  That is a poor assumption.

I do not know the mind of God at all times.  I'm sorry if you think that I should or that I have to in order to really put my faith in him.  Sanctification is progressive and I've got a long way to go.


----------



## stringmusic (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Let me be clear on this for you guys so that we're on the same page.
> 
> I do not know everything about God or how he chooses to operate.  I never will and neither will anyone else.  The Word is very clear about that.
> 
> ...



Awesome, awesome post HF!


----------



## atlashunter (May 20, 2011)

The problem with claiming ignorance HF is that you also claim as a Christian to have a direct line of communication with the creator. So why not just ask him? Aren't you just a bit curious to know why a big tower runs so contrary to his purpose that he has to intervene but weapons of mass destruction don't?

You made a claim about what God could do and why he would do it (claims about his nature). Yet when challenged you simply claim ignorance and say we shouldn't question rather than considering that perhaps the reason the challenge can't be squared with your initial claim is that there is a problem with that claim.

You say Babel was entirely about man being proud of what man can do. Do you not think the same holds true of the space program? Of putting a man on the moon? Of everything we have been able to learn from our explorations of space? Do you think modern man glories in these achievements any less than ancient man gloried in a great tower?

Was Babel really about replacing God? Is that what offended him so badly? If so then why have men been able to replace him without any intervention on his part from ancient times to the present day?


----------



## gordon 2 (May 20, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> A discussion on another forum led to this topic, but it is more appropriate in this forum;
> 
> God is often given credit for providing man with the wisdom and inspiration for inventions, discoveries, advances in medicine, etc.  If it is God's will that mankind progress in this direction, how does that relate to God's response to the Tower of Babel and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?



When discoveries are made so that they serve or benefit others, such as the early 20th century efforts in medicine, then one can say that some of these advances were inspired by spiritual outlooks. In fact some could be said to be miraculous.

The Tower of Babel and the (tree) of the knowledge of Good and Evil are examples were individuals are prompted by their own ego, or pride, to achievements for their own benefits and without God's will--except for their false one(s).


----------



## rjcruiser (May 20, 2011)

I will add to the notion that Babel was about man trying to be God.

That wasn't the only issue at hand.  After the flood, what had God told Noah's sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth to do?  Go out into all the world.  Obviously they didn't.  They stayed in one place.

The confusion and various languages that God forced onto mankind at the time was to force them to disperse and go.



Oh...and Atlas...we can talk to God our Father through prayer.  But to demand to know His thoughts...well, read the book of Job and see what the Lord told Job when he started to question God.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 20, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> One example off the top of my head is space exploration.  The term "rocket science" is commonly associated with the type of intelligent innovation I'm speaking of.  Applying God's response to the Tower of Babel to our modern attempts at space exporation is not too far of a stretch, in my opinion.



The Tower of Babel is about a spiritual quest ( people were gona do it on their own).

The space program was initially a political quest. The West's capitalist and democratic system vs the East's Marxist-Salinist system.

Apple and Oranges.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

> The problem with claiming ignorance HF



Who claimed ignorance?  If "I don't know" is claiming ignorance, then I have to ask you....do you know the answers to all things?



> you also claim as a Christian to have a direct line of communication with the creator. So why not just ask him?



You are, again, operating under the incoorect assumption that if I ask "why?" he's required to answer and explain himself. 

Again, I'll ask you to imagine the arrogance of the created demanding that the Creator explain himself.  



> Aren't you just a bit curious to know why a big tower runs so contrary to his purpose that he has to intervene but weapons of mass destruction don't?



100% yes.  Absolutely I'm curious.  But I do not assume that God is required to answer to Huntinfool.  If he were, then who, exactly, would be God?



> You made a claim about what God could do and why he would do it (claims about his nature). Yet when challenged you simply claim ignorance and say we shouldn't question rather than considering that perhaps the reason the challenge can't be squared with your initial claim is that there is a problem with that claim.



Nope, I made a suggestion as to the explanation based on what I know of God's character.  Once again, I will not be so bold as to demand he answer to me.  And once again, you operate under the false assumption that if you can't SEE him moving on your timeframe, then he must not be.  That is a mistake on your part.




> You say Babel was entirely about man being proud of what man can do. Do you not think the same holds true of the space program? Of putting a man on the moon? Of everything we have been able to learn from our explorations of space? Do you think modern man glories in these achievements any less than ancient man gloried in a great tower?



Being curious, adventurous and impressively brilliant is not the same as brazenly disregarding God.  He put that curiousity in us.  He put that adventurous spirit in us.  

Is the space program done specifically to bring glory to God?  Probably not.  My question to you is why do you require that he tear it to ruins?  Just because he did so with Babel? Is he required to be lockstep consistent in his application just because it doesn't match up with your sense of justice?



> Was Babel really about replacing God? Is that what offended him so badly? If so then why have men been able to replace him without any intervention on his part from ancient times to the present day?



I don't know....I'll ask him. 

Let's be clear though...men have never been able to replace him.


----------



## atlashunter (May 20, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Oh...and Atlas...we can talk to God our Father through prayer.  But to demand to know His thoughts...well, read the book of Job and see what the Lord told Job when he started to question God.



That's fine. Don't demand. I didn't say demand, did I? Ask. You can ask questions can't you? Why would a friend deny you an answer if they had one that was reasonable?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

Think more parent.  It'll help you understand.  Friend, yes.  But your post implies equality and that is not the case.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> All of our problems and disagreements (here on the forum) really boil down to the fact that you require of God (or any diety) that he explain himself to you and the he be fit into a box of "logical" steps in order for you to consider believing.
> 
> Imagine the arrogance of a child demanding a parent explain him/her self.
> 
> Imagine the arrogance of the created demanding that the creator explain himself and justify his holy and righteous decisions and actions.



I don't think it's accurate to label every thread as a debate over the existence of God.  Whether God exists is really not the intended focus of this thread, nor is it about asking God to explain Himself.

The question is, based upon any type of religious belief you happen to hold, is it accurate and correct to credit God with the innovational inspiration for the advancements of mankind?  

Even the most devout Christian could view the story of the Tower of Babel as an example of man on his own achieving political unity and a grand construction project without any inspiration from God.  If that concept is accepted, it becomes difficult to hold the belief that God is the driving force behind all human advancement.


----------



## atlashunter (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Who claimed ignorance?  If "I don't know" is claiming ignorance, then I have to ask you....do you know the answers to all things?



Yes saying "I don't know" is claiming ignorance. I do not know the answers to all things. I am ignorant of many things. But unlike you I don't claim to have a personal communication channel with an omniscient creator of the universe. If I did, I might expect to be able to demonstrate it by acquiring knowledge that I couldn't have acquired on my own and other mere mortals couldn't acquire on their own. You are claiming to have such knowledge when you make claims concerning the nature of a deity that is not known to exist. Yet when put to the test, you claim ignorance. That makes your claims indistinguishable from the claims of someone who is just making stuff up.





Huntinfool said:


> You are, again, operating under the incoorect assumption that if I ask "why?" he's required to answer and explain himself.



I never assumed or suggested that. If he won't provide you with a good answer that's not my problem. It just leaves one with the questions "What does he have to hide?" or "Is there even a "he" at all?". 




Huntinfool said:


> 100% yes.  Absolutely I'm curious.  But I do not assume that God is required to answer to Huntinfool.  If he were, then who, exactly, would be God?



I've been told that understanding of scripture is guided by the spirit. So as this is a question concerning Genesis 11 and it's implications, why would you not get an answer?




Huntinfool said:


> Being curious, adventurous and impressively brilliant is not the same as brazenly disregarding God.  He put that curiousity in us.  He put that adventurous spirit in us.
> 
> Is the space program done specifically to bring glory to God?  Probably not.  My question to you is why do you require that he tear it to ruins?  Just because he did so with Babel? Is he required to be lockstep consistent in his application just because it doesn't match up with your sense of justice?



I'm just curious about the inconsistency. Whatever motivations you want to credit the ancients with that motivated God to intervene, you can find the same throughout history without any divine interventions. It doesn't square with the claims made about God's nature and yet the most logical conclusion, to question whether the story is even true never seems to enter the mind.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Being curious, adventurous and impressively brilliant is not the same as brazenly disregarding God.  He put that curiousity in us.  He put that adventurous spirit in us.



Did God put "that" in us or is "that" something man aquired by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, which was against God's will?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

God put "that" in us....sin corrupted it.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Yes saying "I don't know" is claiming ignorance. I do not know the answers to all things. I am ignorant of many things. But unlike you I don't claim to have a personal communication channel with an omniscient creator of the universe. If I did, I might expect to be able to demonstrate it by acquiring knowledge that I couldn't have acquired on my own and other mere mortals couldn't acquire on their own. You are claiming to have such knowledge when you make claims concerning the nature of a deity that is not known to exist. Yet when put to the test, you claim ignorance. That makes your claims indistinguishable from the claims of someone who is just making stuff up.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I've responded sufficiently to these questions already.  But I'll try one more time knowing it will not be "good enough".  I am a glutton I suppose.

Just like Christians (from your perspective), you continue to spit out the same canned responses over and over again thinking you might get a different result.

God cannot be all-knowing and still fit into our limited understanding of reason or logic.  Does that mean he's illogical?  Absolutely not.  He simply makes the wise look foolish.

My son runs to his bicycle across the driveway because he's so excited to ride it and it seems good to him that he should get to ride it...and I let him because I love him and it also seems good to me.

The next day, my son runs to the same bicycle across the driveway because he's so excited to ride it and it seems good to him that he should get to ride it....and I stop him.

Why?  Perhaps it's time to go to Mimi's house.  Perhaps there is a snake laying in the grass just short of that bicycle.  Perhaps it's time for bed.

It seems to him that it is good and logical that he should ride that bike in both cases.  But I am much more "all-knowing" than he is.  I can see things that he cannot and I make decisions that are better than he does.

Not a perfect analogy because he's not trying to bring glory to himself in those cases.  But the point I'm making is that the two situations seem identical to him.  All he can see is that he is running to the bike and wants to ride it.  There is no difference in the two situations from his understanding of "fair" and "reasonable".  

He may ask me "Why?" in the second instance.  As his father, I may tell him "because there's a snake there son." or I may simply tell him "because I said so and I'm your father...obey."  I may simply grab him up to save him from the snake and I'll let him see the reason LATER.  

I would not dare to put on God that I have to understand everything he does nor would I put on him that he should be required to explain when I ask.

It's not wrong of me to ask and hope for an explanation.  But it is simply not required that he will give it, whether now or in the future.


----------



## atlashunter (May 20, 2011)

I must be a glutton too...

You're right, not a very good analogy. I'll attempt to explain why. 

You're comparing similar actions, one which is allowed and the next not. A real world comparison might be the building of the twin towers. No supernatural intervention to building those despite the fact that an omniscient God would have known the eventual outcome and lives lost as a result. But perhaps Falwell and Robertson are correct that it was used as a tool to punish us, for our own good and according to his will of course.

Now let's go the other direction with the question I posed and make your analogy fit it.

Your son runs to his bike because he is excited to ride it and you stop him. You tell him he can't ride it because he wanted to ride it for his own enjoyment and edification. He should only ride it to show everyone what a wonderful dad you are for giving it to him and teaching him how to ride it. It's for your glory, not his.

The next day you sit and watch your son put together a pipe bomb. You watched him get on the internet and learn how to build it, gather the materials, and you know that once he builds it he intends to blow up your daughter with it. You don't stop him. He builds the pipe bomb, stages it for your daughter while you watch, and then she gets her arm blown off. She later asks you why you didn't stop him. If you had a wise response would you give it? If your response is, "I'm your dad and I know more than you! Don't question me!", what should she conclude from that response?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

That might possibly be the most ridiculous post I've seen in this section of the forums.

But I might surprise myself.  I'm seen some pretty ridiculous stuff in here in the past.

You also were comparing two similar actions.  That was your point in the beginning (and now you're backpeddling and changing the focus).  

Why did God allow WMD's and not Babel?  The implication of the question is he is inconsistent in his application to similar issues.  If they are not similar, then he is not inconsistent.

But you knew that.


----------



## atlashunter (May 20, 2011)

Changing focus? You may want to go back and read my posts again. I've been focused on the WMD question from the start.

Inconsistency is only one issue that has been raised. The inconsistency isn't a matter of when he intervenes but why. You suggested that he intervenes to serve his good purpose.

You said that he can intervene in man's efforts if it serves his good purpose. My question is what good purpose of his is served by not intervening when it comes to innovations that kill people en masse? If WMD don't serve his good purpose and he doesn't intervene, then he is inconsistent.


----------



## Ronnie T (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> That might possibly be the most ridiculous post I've seen in this section of the forums.
> But I might surprise myself.  I'm seen some pretty ridiculous stuff in here in the past.
> 
> You also were comparing two similar actions.  That was your point in the beginning (and now you're backpeddling and changing the focus).
> ...



It would have to be a pretty tall tale to be the most ridiculous post even for this year.
We get a lot of them in the past few weeks.
I'm in the process of working my way off this spiritual forum.
The Christians here have begun spending all their time in endless combat with the mockers, and it just isn't for me anymore.
We seldom have a thread anymore in which Christians discuss Christian issues.

Atlashunter, Hawgjawl, and Six have become the primary focus.
There are more fruitful places and things for me.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

Ronnie T said:


> It would have to be a pretty tall tale to be the most ridiculous post even for this year.
> We get a lot of them in the past few weeks.
> I'm in the process of working my way off this spiritual forum.
> The Christians here have begun spending all their time in endless combat with the mockers, and it just isn't for me anymore.
> ...



I'm sorry you feel that way Ronnie.

I stated in post #37 that the focus of this question is not whether God exists.  This issue COULD be discussed entirely from a Christian standpoint.  That's not to say that I do not welcome everyone and every viewpoint into the discussion.  I'm just saying that there are deeper issues than simply God's existence or God's consistency.

I think that it is a worthy topic to discuss whether or not human advancement is actually something that God desires for man.  Wouldn't man actually be better off in a state of relative "ignorance" in the Garden of Eden?  

People make statements like "God wants us to advance in technology because He cares for us and wants what's best for us".  But who is to say that advancing in technology IS actually good for us?  Perhaps God, knowing the future, does not want us to advance in technology precisely because He knows that it is NOT what is best for us.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> You said that he can intervene in man's efforts if it serves his good purpose.



I said he can intervene....and I often don't know why he does and does not.


See my thoughts on him being all-knowing.


If I were to tell you that there are lots of things that I don't understand about God...If I were to tell you that I have had questions in the past...If I were to tell you that I accept that I will not always understand his methods or his reasons for things...

...would you then assume that you've proven your point and that you "win"?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

> People make statements like "God wants us to advance in technology because He cares for us and wants what's best for us".



Did somebody say that?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Did somebody say that?



Yes.  I've heard many people make similar statements.

I wasn't speaking of people in this particular thread.  I was referring to the general concept in society.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Did somebody say that?



In the mid-1900's scientists developed a vaccine for polio.  Do you credit God for assisting in any manner in the development of this vaccine?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> In the mid-1900's scientists developed a vaccine for polio.  Do you credit God for assisting in any manner in the development of this vaccine?



I credit him for allowing it.  Assist?  I haven't checked his stat sheet lately.  But I do know that he's got an awefully high number of triple doubles.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> I credit him for allowing it.  Assist?  I haven't checked his stat sheet lately.  But I do know that he's got an awefully high number of triple doubles.



Maybe it would be more productive or quicker if I just asked you to cite any example of human advancement that you believe did not come solely from man.  An invention, discovery, or development that you believe warranted the response of "Thank you God".


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

> For by1 him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.
> 
> Colossians 1:16




all of them...how's that for blowing your mind?  Oh man, I know you're gonna have fun with that one.  Let's hear it.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> But yes, man can accomplish many things without God providing the inspiration.



I want to make sure I understand your position.

When inventions, discoveries, developments, etc. are made that advance mankind, do you believe that all should be attributed to God, or some, or...


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

Hitler accomplished many things...I don't think he was inspired by God.  Did God inspire the discovery of a cure for polio?  I have absolutely no idea.


Ever heard of the two wills of God?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> all of them...how's that for blowing your mind?  Oh man, I know you're gonna have fun with that one.  Let's hear it.



So, now it's your position that not ALL of them are from God?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 20, 2011)

All of them warrant the response of "Thank you God" (when referring to the ones that seemingly benefit us).  That's what you were asking.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 20, 2011)

On one end of the spectrum we have man in a state of ignorance of the knowledge of good and evil.  Our reason to believe that this is the condition in which God wanted man to be is because that is the way God created man.  Our reason to believe that God did not want man to acquire the knowledge of good and evil is because God forbade man to eat the fruit that would give man this knowledge.

Somewhere on the other end of the spectrum we have man exploring space in an effort to determine our origin, etc.  What reason do we have to believe that God wants this or any other similar type of advancement?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 23, 2011)

We live in a post "knowledge" era.  The fruit cannot be un-eaten.  


The Bible states very clearly that, if we seek God, we will find him.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> We live in a post "knowledge" era.  The fruit cannot be un-eaten.
> 
> 
> The Bible states very clearly that, if we seek God, we will find him.



Did God "KNOW" ahead of time that the fruit would be eaten?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 23, 2011)

He knew it.  He did not cause it.

Think "flux capacitor".


----------



## Huntinfool (May 23, 2011)

I'm just teeing it up for you in this thread, aren't I?



You're welcome.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> He knew it.  He did not cause it.
> 
> Think "flux capacitor".





I'd agree.

Now here's another interesting twist to that.  Before eating of the fruit, man actually had free-will.  After eating the fruit, no more free-will as the curse of sin had infected all mankind.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 23, 2011)

Fooooooooore!


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> He knew it.  He did not cause it.
> 
> Think "flux capacitor".



Your response about the fruit being eaten and we can't uneat the fruit, would only be applicable if God did not know that man would eat the fruit and thus man changed the course of events and God was then forced to change what He wanted for mankind.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 23, 2011)

I don't get how you make that jump.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> I don't get how you make that jump.



Re-read this thread and it becomes easier


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> I don't get how you make that jump.



God set things up in the Garden of Eden the way He wanted human existence on earth to be.  Man eating the fruit would not change the way God wanted things to be.  If eating the fruit caused God to change His mind about how He wanted human existence on earth to be, that would mean that God does not know the future and is reacting to man's choices and changing His plan along the way to coincide with man's choices.

If you believe that God does not tailor His plan to coincide with man's choices, then what God wanted for man in the Garden of Eden is still what God wants for man.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> God set things up in the Garden of Eden the way He wanted human existence on earth to be.  Man eating the fruit would not change the way God wanted things to be.  If eating the fruit caused God to change His mind about how He wanted human existence on earth to be, that would mean that God does not know the future and is reacting to man's choices and changing His plan along the way to coincide with man's choices.
> 
> If you believe that God does not tailor His plan to coincide with man's choices, then what God wanted for man in the Garden of Eden is still what God wants for man.





I'm not sure I understand.  

I do believe God is omniscient and knew that Eve would listen to the Serpent.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> I'm not sure I understand.
> 
> I do believe God is omniscient and knew that Eve would listen to the Serpent.



Do you believe that God set things up in the Garden of Eden the way He (initially) wanted human existence on earth to be?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 23, 2011)

I'm pretty sure we're about the get the:

If God is X then he is not Y
If God is Y then he cannot be Z

speech....here we go!


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Do you believe that God set things up in the Garden of Eden the way He (initially) wanted human existence on earth to be?



Why do you put "initially" into your question?

God set things up in the Garden the way He wanted.  The world has evolved to this point the exact way He wanted and the exact way He planned.

Maybe I need to explain the definition of omniscience


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> I'm pretty sure we're about the get the:
> 
> If God is X then he is not Y
> If God is Y then he cannot be Z
> ...



Nope.  I'm trying to stick to the OP.  As difficult as it is for me to stay on topic, I'm really trying.  

I'm still discussing man's state of relative ignorance in the Garden of Eden and if God created man in this condition and desired that man remain in this condition.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Why do you put "initially" into your question?
> 
> God set things up in the Garden the way He wanted.  The world has evolved to this point the exact way He wanted and the exact way He planned.
> 
> Maybe I need to explain the definition of omniscience



I put initially in the question to make it as general as possible in order to hopefully get an answer instead of an argument over the question.  It was your choice to include or exclude the "initially".

Are you saying that you believe that everything that has happened in the world and everything that man has done has been "the exact way He wanted and the exact way He planned"?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Are you saying that you believe that everything that has happened in the world and everything that man has done has been "the exact way He wanted and the exact way He planned"?



I wouldn't say the "exact way He wanted."  I know He didn't want Adam and Eve to eat of the fruit....but I know that He knew that they would.

So I would say that everything has turned out the "exact way He planned."


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> I wouldn't say the "exact way He wanted."  I know He didn't want Adam and Eve to eat of the fruit....but I know that He knew that they would.
> 
> So I would say that everything has turned out the "exact way He planned."



So... , God planned the holocaust?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> So... , God planned the holocaust?



I'm not sure if He planned it or if it was something that Satan asked for God's permission to do.  I do know that He allowed it to happen.

Look at Job as an example of something similar.  

Or, another example....the first Battle of Ai....or another example....the Babylonian captivity.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> I'm not sure if He planned it or if it was something that Satan asked for God's permission to do.  I do know that He allowed it to happen.
> 
> Look at Job as an example of something similar.
> 
> Or, another example....the first Battle of Ai....or another example....the Babylonian captivity.



I was really hoping to stay on topic, but here I go again.

If God knows everything I will do in the future and every choice I will make in the future, then nothing God does to me or for me will change that.  If it could be changed, then God did not know the future.  What purpose is served by punishment here on earth?  

Parents use punishment as a tool to change their children's behavior and encourage better choices in the future.  Punishment, properly executed by a parent, can change the future of the child in a positive way.

Punishment by God can change nothing because God already knows the future before applying the punishment.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> I was really hoping to stay on topic, but here I go again.
> 
> If God knows everything I will do in the future and every choice I will make in the future, then nothing God does to me or for me will change that.  If it could be changed, then God did not know the future.  What purpose is serve by punishment here on earth?
> 
> ...



To answer your question in the first paragraph above, read James 1.  I think it will answer it in a way that is better than anyway I could ever do.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> To answer your question in the first paragraph above, read James 1.  I think it will answer it in a way that is better than anyway I could ever do.



I read James 1, but it didn't answer my question.


----------



## formula1 (May 23, 2011)

*Re:*

James 1:17
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.

If you trust God's word as God's word, then you believe its truth above.  Remember this, believe=trust and the opposite is true as well!


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

formula1 said:


> James 1:17
> Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.
> 
> If you trust God's word as God's word, then you believe its truth above.  Remember this, believe=trust and the opposite is true as well!



Maybe I'm just dumb, but I'm not seeing how that answers the question in post #78.


----------



## formula1 (May 23, 2011)

*Re:*



HawgJawl said:


> Maybe I'm just dumb, but I'm not seeing how that answers the question in post #78.



It was intented more for the OP but can also be applied to Post #78 with a little honest thought!

Purpose of Punishment on Earth - so that you will learn to quit trusting in everything else but God and Trust in Him because He is all that matters.

Trust Christ and it will all come together! There is nothing difficult to the simple!


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> What purpose is served by punishment here on earth?





HawgJawl said:


> I read James 1, but it didn't answer my question.



I figured you were talking of punishment to believers...but maybe I didn't understand your original question.  I've quoted James 1 below and I'll highlight those sections that I feel apply.

James 1
Greeting
 1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,


   To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion:



   Greetings.

Testing of Your Faith
 2 Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, 3for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. 4And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing. 5 If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him. 6But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind. 7For that person must not suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; 8 he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

 9Let the lowly brother boast in his exaltation, 10and the rich in his humiliation, because like a flower of the grass he will pass away. 11For the sun rises with its scorching heat and withers the grass; its flower falls, and its beauty perishes. So also will the rich man fade away in the midst of his pursuits.

12 Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him. 13Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. 14But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.
 16Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers. 17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change. 18 Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

Hearing and Doing the Word
 19 Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; 20for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. 21Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.
 22But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. 23For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. 24For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. 25But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.

 26If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. 27Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

formula1 said:


> It was intented more for the OP but can also be applied to Post #78 with a little honest thought!
> 
> Purpose of Punishment on Earth - so that you will learn to quit trusting in everything else but God and Trust in Him because He is all that matters.
> 
> Trust Christ and it will all come together! There is nothing difficult to the simple!



"so that you will learn to" indicates a change in behavior due to a lesson learned.  Like the example I gave of a parent using discipline to change (for the better) the future behavior of a child.

The problem with this concept is, if God KNOWS and has PLANNED the future as Rj submitted, that the future behavior (of the child) is already known before it happens, therefore no purpose is served by any influence by God.  If God did in fact apply discipline in an effort to teach us to make different choices, that would mean that the future is up to us, and is therefore unknown to God.  If God were able to effectively teach us a lesson and we changed our ways and made different decisions, then what exactly are those decisions "different" than?  Has the future been changed?

If God knows the future, then God does not have the ability to change the future.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 23, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If God knows the future, then God does not have the ability to change the future.



If God is perfect, knows the future and has planned the events of the future from the beginning of time, why would he need to change anything?


----------



## formula1 (May 23, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> If God is perfect, knows the future and has planned the events of the future from the beginning of time, why would he need to change anything?



Further, and why would anyone bother to seek Him, since everyone is already 'set'?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> If God is perfect, knows the future and has planned the events of the future from the beginning of time, why would he need to change anything?



Do you believe that prayer has the power to change the course of future events?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 23, 2011)

formula1 said:


> Further, and why would anyone bother to seek Him, since everything is already 'set'?



It sounds like you're disagreeing with Rj, not me.


----------



## atlashunter (May 23, 2011)

formula1 said:


> Further, and why would anyone bother to seek Him, since everything is already 'set'?



Good point.


----------



## formula1 (May 23, 2011)

*Re:*



HawgJawl said:


> It sounds like you're disagreeing with Rj, not me.



Not necessarily, but it could be a little different. What I read from RJ is the plan of God is set and I agree. God's plan is absolutely set! I made a slight error in my wording in my earlier post which I corrected.

Where I might differ slightly (I don't really think so) is that God's people are not 'set' because of their own free will.  They must choose Him. Now, just because God knows what a person will choose does not mean that He had control over that choice. It simply means He has a omnipotent view of the heart that man does not have.

Why would God say in scripture the following if it were not true?

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.


----------



## atlashunter (May 23, 2011)

Why would a good God create people that they know they will send to eternal torment before they create them? Why not just skip the creating of those so that you aren't knowingly creating needless suffering and create those who you know will choose you?


----------



## Huntinfool (May 24, 2011)

We live, think, breath on a linear timeline.  Start, middle, end.

If God is eternal, then there is no beginning and end.  Nor is there a middle.  He sees the beginning and the end at the same time and I'll never be able to explain how I understand this very well.

To be honest, I DON'T understand it very well.

The answer to your question, atlas, is....I don't know.  At least I don't fully understand.  It is one of the things that I am MOST looking forward to knowing some day.

I'm confused in the last few discussions that I've been involved in with you guys though.  Is it that you don't believe he exists or is it just that you don't like the way he operates?

In other words, if I could prove he existed...and he didn't fit the bill for "fair" to you....would you follow him knowing that he was the eternal God?  Or would you still refuse him based on your sense of "fair"?


----------



## atlashunter (May 24, 2011)

Can't speak for the others but my position is two fold.

1. The evidence for his existence is nil.

2. The God of the bible is not as advertised. There are too many contradictory and illogical claims. That points not to a perfect deity but a man made deity.


----------



## Huntinfool (May 24, 2011)

That didn't answer my question.  Go hypothetical with me.


----------



## atlashunter (May 24, 2011)

What was the question?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 24, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Do you believe that prayer has the power to change the course of future events?



The only thing that prayer changes is our own outlook on things.  Again, God doesn't change.  

There are scriptures throughout the Bible that tell us that our prayers accomplish much and the Lord hears us when we cry out.  I would say that He knew we were going to cry out to Him and that was the reason He did something.



formula1 said:


> Not necessarily, but it could be a little different. What I read from RJ is the plan of God is set and I agree. God's plan is absolutely set! I made a slight error in my wording in my earlier post which I corrected.
> 
> Where I might differ slightly (I don't really think so) is that God's people are not 'set' because of their own free will.  They must choose Him. Now, just because God knows what a person will choose does not mean that He had control over that choice. It simply means He has a omnipotent view of the heart that man does not have.
> 
> ...



We would disagree in the "free will" thing.  God can't be in total control if I can choose.  There are plenty of scriptures that tell of our sinfulness and lack of ability to choose righteousness along with scriptures that point to God predestining us to eternity with Him before the foundation of the Earth.  But that is another topic. 



atlashunter said:


> Why would a good God create people that they know they will send to eternal torment before they create them? Why not just skip the creating of those so that you aren't knowingly creating needless suffering and create those who you know will choose you?



See below...my response would be very similar.



Huntinfool said:


> We live, think, breath on a linear timeline.  Start, middle, end.
> 
> If God is eternal, then there is no beginning and end.  Nor is there a middle.  He sees the beginning and the end at the same time and I'll never be able to explain how I understand this very well.
> 
> ...



HF, I don't think they'd believe even if you could prove Him to be real.


----------



## formula1 (May 24, 2011)

*Re:*



rjcruiser said:


> We would disagree in the "free will" thing.  God can't be in total control if I can choose.  There are plenty of scriptures that tell of our sinfulness and lack of ability to choose righteousness along with scriptures that point to God predestining us to eternity with Him before the foundation of the Earth.  But that is another topic.



Fair enough. We agree to disagree in this one point and your are right, it is another topic, already discussed many times and I bet both of our viewpoints are included in those discussions.  God Bless!


----------



## HawgJawl (May 25, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> That didn't answer my question.  Go hypothetical with me.



To me, God and the Bible are two totally different issues.  The validity of one is not dependent upon the other.  

(1)    I do not believe that the Bible is an autobiography.
(2)    I believe that the Bible is a biography written by men.
(3)    I do not believe that finding error in a biography automatically means that the subject of the biography does not exist.
(4)    I do not believe that proving that the subject of the biography does exist automatically means that the biography is inerrant.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 25, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> The only thing that prayer changes is our own outlook on things.  Again, God doesn't change.



If praying for a miracle can not change the course of future events, because the future is already set, then why pray for a miracle?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If praying for a miracle can not change the course of future events, because the future is already set, then why pray for a miracle?



Two reasons I can think of right now...

1.  We are commanded to pray.
2.  It shows our dependence on God.


----------



## Jeffriesw (May 25, 2011)

If God Is Sovereign, Why Pray? (pt. 2)
FROM R.C. Sproul Sep 06, 2010 Category: R.C. Sproul

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/if-god-sovereign-why-pray-pt-2/

Continued from If God Is Sovereign, Why Pray?

The Efficacy of Prayer

We have to guard against taking a fatalistic view of this matter of prayer. We cannot allow ourselves to dismiss prayer from our lives simply because it might not seem to have pragmatic value. Whether or not prayer works, we must engage in it, simply because God Himself commands us to do it. Even a cursory reading of the Bible, particularly the New Testament, reveals a deep emphasis on prayer, supplication, and intercession. It is inescapable that prayer is an expected activity for the people of God. Furthermore, our Lord Himself is the supreme model for us in all things, and He clearly made prayer a huge priority in His life. We can do no less.

But it is also true that Scripture teaches us that prayer does “work” in some sense. Let me cite three examples.

We all know that the apostle Peter boldly declared that he would never betray Jesus, that he was ready to go to prison and even to death for his Lord. But rather than praising Peter for his determination, Jesus rebuked him and said, “Assuredly, I say to you that this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times” (Matt. 26:34). Luke’s account adds an interesting detail to this exchange. Jesus said: “Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you, that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren” (Luke 22:31– 32). Jesus warned Peter that a time of “sifting” was coming in his life, that Satan was going to attack him. But Jesus was sure that Peter would turn from his sin and turn back to Jesus. How could Jesus be sure of that? Well, He had prayed for Peter, that Peter’s faith would not be shaken. Jesus was right—Peter did indeed turn back to Jesus and he did much to strengthen the brethren. Jesus’ prayer for Peter was effective.

Not only do we see the prayers of Jesus effecting change in this world, we also see the prayers of the saints working. In the early days of the church, Peter was thrown into prison, but the believers gathered for a season of intense prayer on his behalf. They poured out their hearts before God, begging God to somehow overcome the adversity of the situation and secure the release of Peter. You know what happened: While they were involved in this intense prayer, there was a knock at the door. They didn’t want to be disturbed from their prayer time, so they sent the servant to the door. When she went to the door and asked who was knocking, Peter answered and the servant recognized his voice. Overjoyed, she left the door closed and ran to tell the others that Peter was outside. The disciples refused to believe it until they opened the door and saw Peter himself standing there. God answered the prayers of His people, delivering Peter from prison by the help of an angel, but when he appeared at the house where the believers were gathered, these people who had prayed so earnestly for his release were fright- ened and shocked that God had actually answered their prayer. That’s the way we are so often; when God answers our prayers, we can hardly believe it.

Moving to a didactic passage, James strongly encourages the people of God to pray:

Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is anyone cheerful? Let him sing psalms. Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up… . Pray for one another, that you may be healed. The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much. (James 5:13–18)

After these stirring words, which strongly emphasize the effectiveness of prayer, James goes on to speak of the prophet Elijah. He stresses that Elijah was a man just like we are—he wasn’t a super-saint or a magician. However, his prayers were extremely powerful. He prayed that God would stop the rain, and no rain at all fell for three and a half years. Then he prayed that God would send rain, and torrents fell.

Given these scriptural passages, and the many, many more that clearly show that prayer does achieve things, we are not free to say: “Well, God is in control. He’s sovereign, immutable, and omniscient, so whatever will be will be. There’s no point in praying.” Scripture universally and absolutely denies that conclusion. Instead, it affirms that prayer does effect change. God, in His sovereignty, responds to our prayers.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 25, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Two reasons I can think of right now...
> 
> 1.  We are commanded to pray.
> 2.  It shows our dependence on God.



Praying for a miracle is a specific type of prayer.  There are many reasons to pray.  The reason I specified a prayer for a miracle is that praying for a mountain to be moved is a prayer for something to happen that would not happen absent the prayer.  Therefore, an answered prayer for a miracle is a change in the course of future events.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Praying for a miracle is a specific type of prayer.  There are many reasons to pray.  The reason I specified a prayer for a miracle is that praying for a mountain to be moved is a prayer for something to happen that would not happen absent the prayer.  Therefore, an answered prayer for a miracle is a change in the course of future events.



And that is where I think you are shorting God in his omnipotence and omniscience.

I believe God knew we would pray for that miracle and He knew He would perform that miracle...so the course of future events was not changed at all.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 25, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> And that is where I think you are shorting God in his omnipotence and omniscience.
> 
> I believe God knew we would pray for that miracle and He knew He would perform that miracle...so the course of future events was not changed at all.



What exactly is miraculous about the course of events NOT changing?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> What exactly is miraculous about the course of events NOT changing?



I guess we have differing views of what a miracle is.  I would say a miracle is turning 2 loaves of bread and 5 fish into a meal for 5,000.  Or turning water to wine....or healing a blind man etc etc.

Life changing events for mankind...no doubt.  But God...He knew those things would happen from before the beginning of time.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 25, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> I guess we have differing views of what a miracle is.  I would say a miracle is turning 2 loaves of bread and 5 fish into a meal for 5,000.  Or turning water to wine....or healing a blind man etc etc.
> 
> Life changing events for mankind...no doubt.  But God...He knew those things would happen from before the beginning of time.



If a plan includes a specific "change" to occur at a specific time, then that "change" is not a change in plans, it IS the plan.

The future is destined to be "A".
Add an answered prayer for a miracle and now the future is "B".

That is a change in the course of future events.
If the answered prayer was planned from the beginning, then the future was always destined to be "B" and therefore there was no change, so the prayer changed nothing.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If the answered prayer was planned from the beginning, then the future was always destined to be "B" and therefore there was no change, so the prayer changed nothing.



Exactly right....to God.

Hard to comprehend...I know....and I don't fully comprehend it.  But God never changes....God knows all things....God is in control of all things....God knows exactly what will happen and how it will happen for all eternity since eternity past.

For us...well...that is a different discussion all together.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 25, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Exactly right....to God.
> 
> Hard to comprehend...I know....and I don't fully comprehend it.  But God never changes....God knows all things....God is in control of all things....God knows exactly what will happen and how it will happen for all eternity since eternity past.
> 
> For us...well...that is a different discussion all together.



Do you believe that there is ANYTHING that a person can do that can change the predestined course of events?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Do you believe that there is ANYTHING that a person can do that can change the predestined course of events?



Nope.  It wouldn't be predestined if it could change....and God wouldn't be omniscient or sovereign either.


----------



## ambush80 (May 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Do you believe that there is ANYTHING that a person can do that can change the predestined course of events?





rjcruiser said:


> Nope.  It wouldn't be predestined if it could change....and God wouldn't be omniscient or sovereign either.



Remember this gem from the past?  Boy, those were fun times:

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=286598&highlight=goldilocks


----------



## rjcruiser (May 25, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Remember this gem from the past?  Boy, those were fun times:
> 
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=286598&highlight=goldilocks



Boy...you had me a little worried there.  I had to go back and reread things to make sure I wasn't saying something different back then 

Guess you could say my position hasn't changed in 2.5 years


----------



## HawgJawl (May 25, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Nope.  It wouldn't be predestined if it could change....and God wouldn't be omniscient or sovereign either.



So, if there is nothing that a person can do to change the future (God's predestined plan), then what purpose is served by reward and punishment?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> So, if there is nothing that a person can do to change the future (God's predestined plan), then what purpose is served by reward and punishment?



Can you expand on the question?  Not really sure I understand what you're asking?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 25, 2011)

Promises of reward and threats of punishment, or the actual granting of rewards and actual infliction of punishments, are tools utilized in an effort to stimulate a desired response and/or change another's behavior.  

If there is nothing that a person can do to change the future (God's predestined plan), then there is no reason for God to apply  reward/punishment.  If no change is possible, then why would God utilize any method to try to facilitate a change?  And if no change is possible, why would God reward or punish the result?


----------



## ambush80 (May 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Promises of reward and threats of punishment, or the actual granting of rewards and actual infliction of punishments, are tools utilized in an effort to stimulate a desired response and/or change another's behavior.
> 
> If there is nothing that a person can do to change the future (God's predestined plan), then there is no reason for God to apply  reward/punishment.  If no change is possible, then why would God utilize any method to try to facilitate a change?  And if no change is possible, why would God reward or punish the result?



I actually kind of like the position that either "you is" or "you ain't" and regardless, you man your post and tow the line for His Glory. It doesn't seem fair, and I think we've gotten to the point through much discussion that for the believer it doesn't have to be, but at least it gives those so inclined to believe a definitive purpose and direction.  It's not my cup of tea.  I don't suppose I have anything else to add to that.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If there is nothing that a person can do to change the future (God's predestined plan), then there is no reason for God to apply  reward/punishment.  If no change is possible, then why would God utilize any method to try to facilitate a change?  And if no change is possible, why would God reward or punish the result?



God obviously finds glory and enjoyment out of His creation.  If not, we wouldn't be around anymore.

As the Bible calls us children of God, I liken the relationship that God has with me like the one I have with my children.  They didn't choose to be my children.  They are just my children....and always will be.  I love them...I punish them...and they love me in return.  Even after I punish them, they love me.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 26, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> God never changes....God knows all things....God is in control of all things....God knows exactly what will happen and how it will happen for all eternity since eternity past.



Here are just a few examples from the Old Testament that indicate that God did not plan future events or even know about events before they happened:

Genesis 6:5-7    God was sorry he ever created man

Genesis 18:20-21    God went to see if Sodom and Gomorrah were really evil

Genesis 22:12    God learned that Abraham truly feared God

Exodus 4:8    If they don't believe

Exodus 13:17    God said something might happen

Exodus 16:28    God asked Moses how long something will continue

Exodus 32:9    God saw how stubborn and rebellious the people were

Exodus 32:12-14    God changed His mind

Exodus 33:3-5    God might be tempted to kill Israel

Exodus 34:27    God gave new laws and made a new covenant with Israel

Leviticus 26:17    God's threats if Israel does not obey His laws

Numbers 14:11    How long will Israel reject me?

Deuteronomy 1:34    God angry about complaining

Deuteronomy 8:2    God tested to see if they would obey

Deuteronomy 9:13-14    God watched and saw how stubborn they were

Deuteronomy 9:20    God wanted to destroy Aaron


----------



## rjcruiser (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Here are just a few examples from the Old Testament that indicate that God did not plan future events or even know about events before they happened:
> 
> Genesis 6:5-7    God was sorry he ever created man
> 
> ...





Yup...you're right.  God changes just like the weather.

Keep stretching that scripture hawg...you might be able to get 73 books out of it somehow.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 26, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Yup...you're right.  God changes just like the weather.
> 
> Keep stretching that scripture hawg...you might be able to get 73 books out of it somehow.



If you believe that all scripture is inerrant, then I just provided you with valid evidence.  Is that your only response?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If you believe that all scripture is inerrant, then I just provided you with valid evidence.  Is that your only response?



No...you pulled verses out of context and put down words that you wanted to put down in versions that suit your purpose.

I don't mind logical debate and discussion.  I don't mind explaining and diving deeper into specific scripture.  However, you have no intent to learn, only to further your own opinion and lack of understanding.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 26, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> No...you pulled verses out of context and put down words that you wanted to put down in versions that suit your purpose.
> 
> I don't mind logical debate and discussion.  I don't mind explaining and diving deeper into specific scripture.  However, you have no intent to learn, only to further your own opinion and lack of understanding.



Those aren't quotes out of context.  Those are summaries of what the entire verse or chapter is relaying.

One example is God going down to check to see if Sodom and Gomorrah were really evil.  If God had planned the course of events, then Sodom and Gomorrah would be exactly what God had planned them to be.  If God knew the future, then Sodom and Gomorrah would be exactly the way God had forseen them to be.  It would be impossible for them to be anything other than what He already knew they would be, so there would be no need for God to ever check to see if anything is any particular way.


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Those aren't quotes out of context.  Those are summaries of what the entire verse or chapter is relaying.
> 
> One example is God going down to check to see if Sodom and Gomorrah were really evil.  If God had planned the course of events, then Sodom and Gomorrah would be exactly what God had planned them to be.  If God knew the future, then Sodom and Gomorrah would be exactly the way God had forseen them to be.  It would be impossible for them to be anything other than what He already knew they would be, so there would be no need for God to ever check to see if anything is any particular way.



Spot on HawgJawl, spot on.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Those aren't quotes out of context.  Those are summaries of what the entire verse or chapter is relaying.
> 
> One example is God going down to check to see if Sodom and Gomorrah were really evil.  If God had planned the course of events, then Sodom and Gomorrah would be exactly what God had planned them to be.  If God knew the future, then Sodom and Gomorrah would be exactly the way God had forseen them to be.  It would be impossible for them to be anything other than what He already knew they would be, so there would be no need for God to ever check to see if anything is any particular way.





bullethead said:


> Spot on HawgJawl, spot on.



Like I said above....you pull out of context.  


Look at verse 17 of Genesis 18.  God asks the rhetorical question if He should hide from Abraham what He is about to do.  He already knew what He was going to do.

In the passage you reference, God is talking to the two angels and to Abraham...telling them that He will go through the motions for Abraham....and Abraham is trying to save S&G....but God knows, there is not even 10 righteous in Sodom.


You can pull a verse here or there to make it say what you want.  If you don't read the context, you'll lack valuable insight as to what the passage is saying.  It is no wonder why you question scripture and don't understand it.

It is like a novel...every couple of pages, you read a sentence....and then claim to know what the author intended.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 26, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Like I said above....you pull out of context.
> 
> 
> Look at verse 17 of Genesis 18.  God asks the rhetorical question if He should hide from Abraham what He is about to do.  He already knew what He was going to do.
> ...



Genesis 18:20-21    So the Lord told Abraham, "I have heard that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah are extremely evil, and that everything they do is wicked. I am going down to see whether or not these reports are true. Then I will know."

Did God actually say this?
Was this the truth?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Genesis 18:20-21    So the Lord told Abraham, "I have heard that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah are extremely evil, and that everything they do is wicked. I am going down to see whether or not these reports are true. Then I will know."
> 
> Did God actually say this?
> Was this the truth?



Why do you continue to ask when you already know the answer?


----------



## HawgJawl (May 26, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Why do you continue to ask when you already know the answer?



Because when you answer those questions with "yes" and "yes", you will contradict what you stated in post #124.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Because when you answer those questions with "yes" and "yes", you will contradict what you stated in post #124.



Nope.  No contradiction.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 26, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Nope.  No contradiction.



If there would be no contradiction, you would have answered the questions instead of avoiding them.


----------



## rjcruiser (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If there would be no contradiction, you would have answered the questions instead of avoiding them.







HawgJawl said:


> Did God actually say this?
> Was this the truth?



Yes...Yes.



rjcruiser said:


> Nope.  No contradiction.



Re-read #124.  Still no contradiction.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Genesis 18:20-21    So the Lord told Abraham, "I have heard that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah are extremely evil, and that everything they do is wicked. I am going down to see whether or not these reports are true. Then I will know."



Was it true that God was going down to see if the reports were true and then He would know, or was this an untrue statement because He already knew?


----------



## rjcruiser (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Was it true that God was going down to see if the reports were true and then He would know, or was this an untrue statement because He already knew?



You must not have read post #124.


Have you ever known something, but then told the person you were with, let's go over and find out what happened.  All the while, you already knew, but said it anyways?

I think I've been pretty patient in this whole discussion.  I've tried to explain it and provide the context that you can't grasp.  Obviously, I've failed.

Have a great Memorial day weekend everyone.  I'm done in this thread.


----------



## atlashunter (May 26, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Nope.  No contradiction.


----------



## bullethead (May 26, 2011)

HawgJawl it is not gods fault it is the writers fault. They wanted to make their main character infallible and inerrant but their stories didn't hold up those specifications. He is above all human standards except when the writers have him doing the same things humans do. The believers will speak for god as only they can understand his motives, yet they say no one can know what he thinks. He is above our ways  and as RJ says 





> "Have you ever known something, but then told the person you were with, let's go over and find out what happened. All the while, you already knew, but said it anyways?"


 there are times when god who knows everything but just wants to double check.

Above all, check out post #124, if you havn't heard already.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 27, 2011)

It appears that I'm not a good student and am too slow to learn, so back to the original post;

Based upon God's reaction to "eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" and "the Tower of Babel", is there any reason for us to believe that God wishes for mankind to advance technologically?


----------



## ambush80 (May 27, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> It appears that I'm not a good student and am too slow to learn, so back to the original post;
> 
> Based upon God's reaction to "eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" and "the Tower of Babel", is there any reason for us to believe that God wishes for mankind to advance technologically?




From what I can tell (granted I'm not favored with the magic discerning power), God should be most pleased with the Amish.  I like them too.  Darn fine Christians.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 27, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> From what I can tell (granted I'm not favored with the magic discerning power), God should be most pleased with the Amish.  I like them too.  Darn fine Christians.



I didn't consider the Amish.  That's a good point.


----------



## gtparts (May 27, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> It appears that I'm not a good student and am too slow to learn, so back to the original post;
> 
> Based upon God's reaction to "eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" and "the Tower of Babel", is there any reason for us to believe that God wishes for mankind to advance technologically?



Neither enterprise of human effort mentioned above was a case of man attempting to advance technology, nor of God working against human technological advancement.

Back up again, Charlie Brown. I just know you can put one through the goal posts.


----------



## ambush80 (May 27, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> I didn't consider the Amish.  That's a good point.



If I ever became a Christian I'm sure that's where I would end up.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 31, 2011)

gtparts said:


> Neither enterprise of human effort mentioned above was a case of man attempting to advance technology, nor of God working against human technological advancement.
> 
> Back up again, Charlie Brown. I just know you can put one through the goal posts.



I agree that eating forbidden fruit is not identical to launching man into space.  That's why I said "based upon" God's response to these two examples.

Man was living in a state of relative ignorance in the Garden of Eden.  Since that's the way God created man's existence on earth, it's safe to assume that's the way God wanted it to be.  When man disobeyed and acquired knowledge, God was upset.  In the beginning, at least, God was not a fan of human advancements in worldly knowledge.  Why specifically should we believe that God has changed His mind about that?


----------



## gtparts (May 31, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> I agree that eating forbidden fruit is not identical to launching man into space.  That's why I said "based upon" God's response to these two examples.
> 
> Man was living in a state of relative ignorance in the Garden of Eden.  Since that's the way God created man's existence on earth, it's safe to assume that's the way God wanted it to be.  When man disobeyed and acquired knowledge, God was upset.  In the beginning, at least, God was not a fan of human advancements in worldly knowledge.  Why specifically should we believe that God has changed His mind about that?



Really?



> Since that's the way God created man's existence on earth, it's safe to assume that's the way God wanted it to be.



I wouldn't assume "that's the way God wanted it to be." God seems to expect mankind to advance, having given us powers of observation and reasoning. His character of being the creative force of the universe, is mirrored to some extent, in His creation.




> When man disobeyed and acquired knowledge, God was upset.



Ahem!!! It was a very specific knowledge..... the knowledge of good and evil. It was not generic knowledge. But, you are right, God was not happy about the disobedience or the fact that His creation now must bear the burden of knowingly doing wrong. They were told not to eat of that fruit to protect them. 

And finally,



> In the beginning, at least, God was not a fan of human advancements in  worldly knowledge.  Why specifically should we believe that God has  changed His mind about that?



in order,
(1) God has never been against men acquiring general knowledge AND wisdom.
and 
(2) God has not changed His mind on the subject.


----------



## HawgJawl (May 31, 2011)

gtparts said:


> I wouldn't assume "that's the way God wanted it to be." God seems to expect mankind to advance, having given us powers of observation and reasoning. His character of being the creative force of the universe, is mirrored to some extent, in His creation.



Comparing various civilizations across the globe throughout history, do you believe that "advancement" has made man happier?  Do you believe that "advancement" has increased or decreased man's focus on and trust in God?

I'm just not convinced that mankind is headed in the direction that God "originally wished" for mankind.


----------



## gtparts (May 31, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Comparing various civilizations across the globe throughout history, do you believe that "advancement" has made man happier?  Do you believe that "advancement" has increased or decreased man's focus on and trust in God?
> 
> I'm just not convinced that mankind is headed in the direction that God "originally wished" for mankind.



God is more focused in how He deals with men than to lump us all together, but I can see your point. I would say, both individually and collectively, man has dropped the ball more than once. 

Happier? Temporarily sated, maybe! But God is more concerned about our character than our happiness. 
Now, joy, that's another matter. Joy is only found in the Lord.

As for "advancement", like much in life, it carries (almost always) a dual nature..... an "up" side and a "down" side.

For example:
 Fire has cooked our food, kept us warm in the cold, provided light and protection. It has also destroyed our crops, our homes, our businesses, our property, and our families. 

Man has a unique capacity for allowing things to draw him to God and to separate him from God. Sometimes it is the same thing, just different people. "Personal tragedy" comes to mind.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 5, 2011)

We give credit to God when advancements occur in medicine, as long as we believe that those advancements are "good".  What if there's not a majority concensus on whether or not the new development is "good"?  If God deserves the credit for new advancements in medicine, then simply by the fact that a new development occurs, would that not automatically mean that it is from God and is "good"?


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

Did God provide man with the innovational inspiration to develop stem cell research and cloning?


----------



## thedeacon (Jul 8, 2011)

Sometimes man takes what God has made and uses it in ways that God did not intend it to be used.

God never intended for man to take the  life that God has created just so it could be taken.

Just my opinion.
God bless


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

thedeacon said:


> Sometimes man takes what God has made and uses it in ways that God did not intend it to be used.
> 
> God never intended for man to take the  life that God has created just so it could be taken.
> 
> ...



The way that this assertion is usually applied is that if something is good, God made it, but if it is bad, man took what God had made and used it in a bad way.

That brings me back to my previous post regarding situations when there is no clear concensus on whether it is good or bad.  If YOU view it as good, then God made it.  If YOU view it as bad, then man misused what God made.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

Why do you keep this "innovational inspiration" thought/thread alive?

Seems like you've gotten plenty of answers...just maybe not ones that suit your opinion.


----------



## formula1 (Jul 8, 2011)

*Re:*

But our view has no relevance to the discussion, for we are not priviledged to know the mind of God.  We cannot know good because we are evil. Only God knows good! Period!

Now, it is possble for us to see something as good or bad in our own eyes and based on our own pre-suppositions on what good or bad is, or rather on our learned ability to discern good or bad. But we cannot know it as God knows it in His own omnipotent view. 

Yet, much of good and bad in God's eyes has been revealed in scripture, if you accept that viewpoint. If you don't, well then you are your own god of good and bad! And that is what most men prefer to be!


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

formula1 said:


> But our view has no relevance to the discussion, for we are not priviledged to know the mind of God.  We cannot know good because we are evil. Only God knows good! Period!
> 
> Now, it is possble for us to see something as good or bad in our own eyes and based on our own pre-suppositions on what good or bad is, or rather on our learned ability to discern good or bad. But we cannot know it as God knows it in His own omnipotent view.
> 
> Yet, much of good and bad in God's eyes has been revealed in scripture, if you accept that viewpoint. If you don't, well then you are your own god of good and bad! And that is what most men prefer to be!



The reason I brought up stem cell research is that it is viewed by many as being good, while the majority of the opposition to stem cell research is from religious groups.


----------



## formula1 (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> The reason I brought up stem cell research is that it is viewed by many as being good, while the majority of the opposition to stem cell research is from religious groups.



Yes, I know.  Not all stem cell research is bad from my point of view (only that which is embryonic and requires the taking of a life).

For example, I know that I pray for doctors almost daily for God to grant wisdom to doctors to help my own son's issues.  And their are great advancements occurring all the time in this area(using SC research harvest from the body) that may someday help him. They are not from embryonic stem cells and I would not want to trade life for that advancement, even if it could affect my own son.  Personally, I trust God more than that! But that's just me and my own viewpoint. God bless!


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> while the majority of the opposition to stem cell research is from religious groups.



That has very little to do with the research, but rather how the stem cells were obtained.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

formula1 said:


> Yes, I know.  Not all stem cell research is bad from my point of view (only that which is embryonic and requires the taking of a life).
> 
> For example, I know that I pray for doctors almost daily for God to grant wisdom to doctors to help my own son's issues.  And their are great advancements occurring all the time in this area(using SC research harvest from the body) that may someday help him. They are not from embryonic stem cells and I would not want to trade life for that advancement, even if it could affect my own son.  Personally, I trust God more than that! But that's just me and my own viewpoint. God bless!



I'm fairly ignorant on the subject of stem cell research, so forgive me if my question isn't correct.  How do you feel about utilizing cloning technology to "manufacture" stem cells?  Does that trigger any "religious" reservations?


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> That has very little to do with the research, but rather how the stem cells were obtained.



It still is applicable if someone believes that God provided the wisdom and inspiration to the first person who discovered that stem cells could be harvested and utilized, especially in the manner that is in question?


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> It still is applicable if someone believes that God provided the wisdom and inspiration to the first person who discovered that stem cells could be harvested and utilized, especially in the manner that is in question?



No...not really.

When you have to kill the fetus to get to the stem cells....it is evil because of the abortion.

When all you do is get some cord blood to get the stem cells, it isn't an issue.

You yourself say you don't know much about stem cell research.  Maybe you should study it a bit more before you try and form an opinion on it and ii.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> No...not really.
> 
> When you have to kill the fetus to get to the stem cells....it is evil because of the abortion.
> 
> ...



My purpose was not to try to form an opinion on stem cell research.  My purpose was to explore different types of innovative discoveries in medicine that are considered good by some and "evil" by others.  If a higher being is always to be credited with providing the innovative inspiration for a discovery, then all discoveries must be either good (from God) or bad (from the devil).  There can be no gray area.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> My purpose was not to try to form an opinion on stem cell research.  My purpose was to explore different types of innovative discoveries in medicine that are considered good by some and "evil" by others.  If a higher being is always to be credited with providing the innovative inspiration for a discovery, then all discoveries must be either good (from God) or bad (from the devil).  There can be no gray area.



But your idea of innovational inspiration is flawed.  I think that was answered on page 1...and hence my post above questioning your motives.

Secondly, your idea of stem cell research being both evil and good is not correct either.  It is good.  Just the means of obtaining is evil.  

It is like saying all medicine is bad because if you take too much Tylenol, you can die.


----------



## thedeacon (Jul 8, 2011)

Discussions with some people is like wrestling with a hog, you are both going to get real dirty and the hog is going to have a good time.

No pun intended


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> My purpose was not to try to form an opinion on stem cell research.  My purpose was to explore different types of innovative discoveries in medicine that are considered good by some and "evil" by others.  If a higher being is always to be credited with providing the innovative inspiration for a discovery, then all discoveries must be either good (from God) or bad (from the devil).  There can be no gray area.



Disagree.
Our minds must always be open to the good or evil that might be found sitting next to each other in the research laboratory.  When good is found, evil will always be near.
As individuals, we are often prone to go to the extreme on issues of research.
Many Christians don't want anything that deals with stemcell research.  And they do it out of ignorance of the subject, of which I profess to be.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

Ronnie T said:


> Disagree.
> Our minds must always be open to the good or evil that might be found sitting next to each other in the research laboratory.  When good is found, evil will always be near.
> As individuals, we are often prone to go to the extreme on issues of research.
> Many Christians don't want anything that deals with stemcell research.  And they do it out of ignorance of the subject, of which I profess to be.



Ronnie,
Thank you for being nice.  I honestly don't think I've ever been rude or disrespectful to anyone on this forum.  If I've spoken in an offensive manner toward anyone, I apologize for it, but like I said, I can't remember ever doing so.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> I honestly don't think I've ever been rude or disrespectful to anyone on this forum.  If I've spoken in an offensive manner toward anyone, I apologize for it, but like I said, I can't remember ever doing so.



Was anyone accusing you of being rude or disrespectful?


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> But your idea of innovational inspiration is flawed.  I think that was answered on page 1...and hence my post above questioning your motives.
> 
> Secondly, your idea of stem cell research being both evil and good is not correct either.  It is good.  Just the means of obtaining is evil.
> 
> It is like saying all medicine is bad because if you take too much Tylenol, you can die.



I know that it's a slight difference, but it's a very significant difference; the focal point is not the resulting "thing" from the research but the intitial wisdom or spark of inspiration that is usually attributed to a higher power.  That's why the particular method of stem cell research is not the focus, rather the initial discovery of the entire concept.  An omniscient power would know what the resulting "thing" would be prior to providing the intial spark of inspiration.

An example would be a nuclear bomb.  An omniscient power would know ahead of time exactly how humans would ultimately use this technology.  The omniscient power would then have the choice of whether or not to provide the spark of inspiration necessary for humans to develop this technology.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Was anyone accusing you of being rude or disrespectful?



No, just wondering why some people on this forum are so often less than courteous to me.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> I know that it's a slight difference, but it's a very significant difference; the focal point is not the resulting "thing" from the research but the intitial wisdom or spark of inspiration that is usually attributed to a higher power.  That's why the particular method of stem cell research is not the focus, rather the initial discovery of the entire concept.  An omniscient power would know what the resulting "thing" would be prior to providing the intial spark of inspiration.
> 
> An example would be a nuclear bomb.  An omniscient power would know ahead of time exactly how humans would ultimately use this technology.  The omniscient power would then have the choice of whether or not to provide the spark of inspiration necessary for humans to develop this technology.



Then I guess you have issues with God creating mankind since he knew that Adam and Eve would eat of the fruit?

Is it hard to believe that God allows evil to happen?


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> No, just wondering why some people on this forum are so often less than courteous to me.



Do you not view yourself as a pot stirrer?

I don't think anyone is being less than courteous to you...just questioning your motives based on your position and posting history.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Then I guess you have issues with God creating mankind since he knew that Adam and Eve would eat of the fruit?
> 
> Is it hard to believe that God allows evil to happen?



No, what I'm getting at is that maybe God does not provide the initial inspiration for ALL advancements in technology.  Maybe a few of them came from man.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Do you not view yourself as a pot stirrer?
> 
> I don't think anyone is being less than courteous to you...just questioning your motives based on your position and posting history.



I view a pot stirrer as someone who tries to get people arguing about anything they can, but they have no real opinion on the subject, they provide no valid argument, and they are unable to support anything they assert, even if they had the desire to support their assertions.  I don't think I fit into that category.

The majority of my posts on this thread are in the form of a question.  My questions often are tailored in an attempt to get a willing participant to commit to a certain position on a couple of different issues.  Then I attempt to illustrate how the two issues are in contrast with each other, or how belief in one excludes the other.  If I am able to show someone how their own beliefs are inconsistent, then I'm labeled a pot stirrer.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> No, what I'm getting at is that maybe God does not provide the initial inspiration for ALL advancements in technology.  Maybe a few of them came from man.



I won't repost what I wrote on page 1 of this thread.  My opinion hasn't changed.



HawgJawl said:


> I view a pot stirrer as someone who tries to get people arguing about anything they can, but they have no real opinion on the subject, they provide no valid argument, and they are unable to support anything they assert, even if they had the desire to support their assertions.  I don't think I fit into that category.
> 
> The majority of my posts on this thread are in the form of a question.  My questions often are tailored in an attempt to get a willing participant to commit to a certain position on a couple of different issues.  Then I attempt to illustrate how the two issues are in contrast with each other, or how belief in one excludes the other.  If I am able to show someone how their own beliefs are inconsistent, then I'm labeled a pot stirrer.



No...you're labeled a pot stirrer and your motives are questioned because the questions were answered (for the most part) and the thread was dead for more than a month...then you resurrect it.

Also, like you stated above, you ask questions to try and trap people and put them on the defensive.  I'd say that is pot stirring.  

Honest questions? No problem.  Questions to entrap?  Pot stirring.

Oh...btw...I'm guilty of it too.  It is an effective debate tool.


----------



## formula1 (Jul 8, 2011)

*Re:*



HawgJawl said:


> I'm fairly ignorant on the subject of stem cell research, so forgive me if my question isn't correct.  How do you feel about utilizing cloning technology to "manufacture" stem cells?  Does that trigger any "religious" reservations?



I don't know much about that, but I would have  'conscious' reservations to cloning human life for that purpose. No issue with cloning animals for research for the benefit of humans.  Again, just my thoughts.  I'm glad I don't have to make such a choice as  it is not my profession.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Also, like you stated above, you ask questions to try and trap people and put them on the defensive.  I'd say that is pot stirring.
> 
> Honest questions? No problem.  Questions to entrap?  Pot stirring.
> 
> Oh...btw...I'm guilty of it too.  It is an effective debate tool.



Not to try to trap people, to try to illustrate to people how some of the beliefs that they already hold are in conflict with other beliefs they already hold.  Most people never compare the two beliefs side-by-side because the two beliefs have never come up at the same time.  Anyone who is afraid to at least consider whether or not their own beliefs are self-contradicting should ignore my posts.

Also, I figured the support and encouragement forum would be the appropriate place for someone to go if they wanted to make sure that they never encountered someone with a different opinion than their's.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Not to try to trap people, to try to illustrate to people how some of the beliefs that they already hold are in conflict with other beliefs they already hold.  Most people never compare the two beliefs side-by-side because the two beliefs have never come up at the same time.  Anyone who is afraid to at least consider whether or not their own beliefs are self-contradicting should ignore my posts.
> 
> Also, I figured the support and encouragement forum would be the appropriate place for someone to go if they wanted to make sure that they never encountered someone with a different opinion than their's.



Sounds like  to me.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 8, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


> Sounds like  to me.



It sounds like you prefer your food to be burned and stuck to the bottom of the pot then.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jul 8, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> It sounds like you prefer your food to be burned and stuck to the bottom of the pot then.



Courteous.  Just like you always are.


----------

