Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

for yall in South Florida

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
likeitis:

Say what you want bro and whatever you believe is cool with me. But your long post about your beliefs shows all the more how much of a religion it is. There is just as much evidence to prove that God is for real as there is to prove evolution is for real, actually a lot more. Add the individual spiritual evidence and you have 100% fact. But do we really need to go through another 13 plus pages in proving that again?

Maybe you can answer my question since no one else has. What did we evolve from and then what did that evolve from?

If it is so concrete how come no one has given a logical answer about that yet?
 
Consider: a man believes — beyond any doubt — that his god is the only god, is all-powerful and all-knowing, has created him and the entire universe around him, and is capricious, jealous, vindictive, and violent.

These descriptions made about a human would be a real indictment. Aside from "capricious", the rest can be ascribed to our view of a God that is all powerful, and the Creator of the universe. We are fearful of power, want to dodge any judgement and pain to ourselves. If anyone is right having these aspects, would it not be ONLY God?

Science relies heavily on faith. Things like gravity, that we can only appreciate as an observation, with no explanation. We are confident that we can design devices that would not work without the presence of gravity, and rely on the biased expectation that gravity will be there today, tomorrow and the next day. Yet, we have no idea of what manner of force gravity might be, how to reproduce it, control it, manage it, it's all a mystery. We have faith that because the earth has so-and-so mass we can expect to observe so-and-so amount of gravitational strength. And that is where, aside from some really interesting thought about the orientation of nuclear particles, is where it ends.

Our relationship to God is not so much like a man to his draft animal. If we were draft animals, He would be relying on us for work, and He does not need us to provide for Him. Specifically, we are like sheep, and He is the good shepard. Rather than being insulted, which I think is an element in your complaint, we instead should be humbled by this comparison. Instsead of being willful, we should be obedient. We are not. When God says "stop this behavior", many will trust their own human reasoning, and say "we have a right to be doing this". The result? Two cities completely destroyed to set everyone else straight, no pun intended. A woman's elements transmuted to sodium chloride because she disobeyed God's directive. This is the account we are given.

The short observation is that science is an empirical study of God's creation, with man wandering through the elements and forces like the children we are, asking, testing, and getting our fingers burned. Headstrong and willfull, we are convinced our feces are becoming less pungent with every discovery and process we patent. We are only fooling ourselves. God decided a long time ago to dictate how our relationship to Him will progress. He has that right as our Creator. Without Him, we would not even exist to hold a fossil in our hand and say "look here!", extremely pleased with ourselves.

There are many beliefs, and some say that they are all mutually correct. This is ecumenicalism, and it is wrong, as if God is somehow "confused". Some say that no belief besides science is worthy (you, my friend?) and that is wrong, since the Bible tells us that "it is He that has made us, and not we ourselves".

So, He has the right, as the Creator, to act any way He wants. Like a parent and a two year old, He has simple guidlines that do not preclude scientific discovery, but instead form a framework in which to view our discoveries. It's His ball, and His game. We can play it, and play it well, or lose big time. That's the freewill choice we have, like it or not. You can complain about it, but it will do you no good. You can be angry, and say that you should be able to touch and measure such a God, and hold Him to your standards of personality, and make Him a big, friendly neighbor like Wilson on tool time: always friendly and wise, unwilling to hurt a single person. That "Wilson" god is not OUR God. Our God is all powerful, and the master of all of His creations, including us. He knows we are simple compared to Him, so He made the rules simple, starting with "Ten" rules and enlightening more from there.

We are wise to meet Him on His terms: (paraphasing) *have faith in me, and salvation through the sacrifice of my son. Study my word, and make it a part of your life. Be humble, and obey. You are my sheep. The best is yet to come, for those who will follow.*

If this seems too simple, we are simple. Compare the capacity of a single celled organism to a city block full of Cray computers, and you do not yet have an accurate comparison of man to his God.

We are wise to follow.
 
So...the guy uses an AgCat, that explains why it sounded like a radial.
Ok, i think that answered my initial question.
 
crash-proof said:
...that answered my initial question.
I'm sorry, what was the question? :D

Just think, Crash, if you hadn't been that curious about the Holy Skywriter, this whole circus wouldn't have happened!

(I don't blame you: I'd have asked about it too.)
 
By the way, this...
crash-proof said:
Anyone know anything about this fruitloop?
...is what got you in trouble with the Bible crowd!
 
I got nothin against fruitloops, honestly. They taste great.
 
"Fruitloop".

If Siegfreid and Roy ever sponsor an aerobatic team, this would have to be their signature maneuver.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top