Worldviews

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by Tactical Lever

Well you can research it for yourself, I quoted Scientific American in one link. Just google a point and you will actually find some non Christian scientist who will provide evidence for my points. Just because lots believe it doesn't make it true. Isn't that what all the atheists say?

you are doing what most religious people do, picking and choosing what you listen to and ignoring the rest, here is the consensus about the age of the earth.

The age of the Earth is 4.54 billion years (4.54 × 109 years ± 1%). This age is based on evidence from radiometric age dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples. Following the scientific revolution and the development of radiometric age dating, measurements of lead in uranium-rich minerals showed that some were in excess of a billion years old.

so it's either 4.54 billion years old or 6000 years old?

there is only one truth it can't be both, maybe the 6000 year theory is due to that being about the time in human evolution we were able to start communicating and establishing written word I don't know, but it can't be both 4.54 billion and 6000, the white house can't be both white and black depending on who you ask, it's white.

[greylynx]

Originally Posted by Arachnodisiac

That every species large and small has a place on this earth?

Thanks Mom.

Some people don't think that way.

Humans must go and everything else stays.

Until humans evolve again.

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by Arachnodisiac

That every species large and small has a place on this earth?

That's a good start . Actually though, I think that message comes out way back in Genesis 1 - where, after God finished the initial great work of creating in all kinds of intricate, complex and amazing detail, placing "every species large and small" in it's place, He sat back, looked at it all with delight and said, "Very Good!" (Gensis 1:31)

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by guywiththemule

Uhh.. don`t p!$$ off your god or he will drown most of you but he will save the animals because they know more than men ? I don`t know...

I had to laugh at that response, good one! Sometimes I do wonder if animals do know more than men!

Seriously though, in the Noah / ark story the reason God flooded the world was, well, here's what Genesis 6:5-8 says, "The Lord saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. So the Lord said, “I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”
The Holy Bible : New International Version. electronic ed. Grand Rapids : Zondervan, 1996, c1984

The reason God saved Noah and his family is said in verse 9, "Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God." In other words, he was a believer and conducted his life in such a way that God, to borrow your eloquent term, was not pi$$ed with him.

Perhaps the spiritual message is that even though mankind in general had become so wicked and evil, and God was 'grieved" ( which means He was extremely hurt and disappointed), God was going to begin again - provide a new start.

[Mistagin]

I'll try to explain.

Originally Posted by eastcoast

your telling me a child 1 year old with terminal cancer got it because of their sins?
Not at all, I would never say that. Sin, which is corporately 'owned' by all human beings - even Christians, has 'corrupted' the creation that was originally declared by God to be "very good." Sin, initiated by Satan, brought in something that was very bad (to put it mildly), it 'infected' everything in our world. That opened up the door for all kinds of unpleasant stuff - including terrible diseases like cancers. In a way we all participate in the consequences wrought by sin - and those consequences / results are no respecter of any person.
The thing is, a world that says to God, "we don't want you," gets just that - a world where God withholds His blessings and power - to a degree. Fortunately, as the Bible also says, God so loves His creation He doesn't abandon it. In His own plan and strategy for doing so He is working to restore it, preserve it. He still blesses it, and He often chooses to do so through people who believe in Him and follow Him. So in a way it's a good thing there are believers around - because we are here God is working good in the world - and everybody gets the benefit. Theologically that is called 'common grace'.

I see how it works everything that happens thats good is because god made it so, Correct - and He even works good sometimes through people who don't even know Him everything that happens thats bad is because it's gods will, or sin or any other excuse they can find to not blame god for it, Partly true. If we understand the devastating consequences of sin there are no excuses - it's, in a big-picture paradigm way of describing it, 'our' (meaning humanity's in general) fault. Can't honestly say it's God 's will because will except to say that in His 'permissive' will God allows bad stuff to happen - and I can't really explain why! All I can say is that I believe He has a good reason that is not clear yet. can't have it both ways though. Right, and people are quick to blame God when bad things happen, but just as quick to not praise Him for the good.

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

I'll try to explain.

that's the biggest cop out I have ever heard.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

so he is also responsible for cancer and hitler too?

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Nope, that's all consequences of sin.

Oh good, then rather then allopathic treatment of cancer, let us just have a good old fashion exorcism, and drive that devil that is causing the cancer out of there.

Should work every time!

Let us know when it worked for people in your family stricken with cancer.

[The Elkster]

Can't fix stupid and likewise ya can't fix niave. Its this religious "belief" that has led to bullheaded BS on both the christian and Muslim side of the coin. I used to wonder why a tiny part of civilization aka isreal used take up so much energy til I realized its just a battlefront for religious zealots from both sides of the coin. Then it all made sense.

I see the christian right are ratcheting up the rehetoric against Iran and Iran is throwing it right back as they always have. Funny/ironic part....taking a more moderate stance on either side of the zealotry "I'm right" that has the best chance of diffusing the problem...Fat chance I know I know...what place does common sense have in all this religious hoopla. Better to just throw our hands up in the air, claim my book is more infallable than yours, let ego's and "faith" prevail and throw an army at the problem. Now that makes sense!!! Thank god for religion!

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

where did the water come from,
Well the story says it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. That's heck of a lot of rain! Other than that, I don't know. If GOd's is a Creator, I'm pretty sure He can create lots of rain and where did it go?
Well, the book says, God, " sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded." (Genesis 8:1) Anybody who lives in farm country knows that wind does a fantastic job of drying things out, especially when the sun comes out too. and where is this arc?
That's a good question! Here's something I wonder about: the ark was built of wood, right? According to the story it was designed and built for one purpose, one voyage. So why does the argument you just asked in your question keep coming up? Is it not logical to assume that a wooden ship would rot away - especially one that had all that stuff left behind by all kinds of animals - and was built thousands of years ago? I don't think wood preservatives were slathered on it!
When I was a kid I built a wooden boat, a type of kayak. That was about 40 years ago. It's gone, totally rotted away. I'll bet it'd be hard to even find a nail from it anymore. and how did animals from argentina get to the middle east?
Maybe God just miraculously tele-ported them over to the ark launch site. Maybe they all drowned. Maybe God just recreated them after the fact. After all, He likes to create That's something you can ask Him when you see him.
I hear there is a man who delivers presents to all the children around the world in 1 night, which one is more believable.
Aw man, didja havta bring up those bad memories . I've been waiting for that guy all my life - 56 years - and he's never shown up yet. do ya think I mighta done something bad he knows about?

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

that's the biggest cop out I have ever heard.

Hmmmm, in what way?

I did try to explain - simply. Didja not read the blue reply font text I posted?

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by avb3

Oh good, then rather then allopathic treatment of cancer, let us just have a good old fashion exorcism, and drive that devil that is causing the cancer out of there.

Should work every time!

Let us know when it worked for people in your family stricken with cancer.

Okay, thanks for asking.

Although we didn't have an exorcism per se in any of these cases, the believers in my families prayed, people in our churches prayed, a lot of other believers prayed, and 2 of my BIL's who had cancer don't have it today. My Mom has battled it on and off and right now she is declared cancer free and living life to the full. They are the only 3 in my family who've had cancer at a younger age and are doing great. There have been a few aged people who died with cancer in their bodies though - did the cancer do them in? It probably contributed to it, but when people are in their late 80's or 90's it's probably safe to say 'old age' got them.

Also, and I hope you are trying to be funny, but note that I never said it's the devil's fault.

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Hmmmm, in what way?

I did try to explain - simply. Didja not read the blue reply font text I posted?

I already explained it but il do it again, after all I just passed 4000 posts and I didn't get there by not posting.

you cant give "god" credit for everything good and at the same time disolve him of any bad for whatever reason, if it's true that whatever happens is because god does it, then you must accept that whatever bad that happens is also his fault, if I go to work tommorow and say I will accept all the good that happens around here is because of me, but anything that happens thats bad is not my fault they would laugh at me, it's cherry picking and trying to have it both ways, if god creates life and all the great things, then he is also responsible for adolph hitler and all the bad hitler did.

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by avb3

Oh good, then rather then allopathic treatment of cancer, let us just have a good old fashion exorcism, and drive that devil that is causing the cancer out of there.

Should work every time!

Let us know when it worked for people in your family stricken with cancer.

I believe he is speaking about original sin. Prior to that there was no sickness or illness. Man would not have even tasted of death had he listened and obeyed. But like sin, cancer destroys the body. This is why we race to cut it out or find ways to cure it.

I would think there are more important things to consider than what destroys the body, for as a result of original sin everyone now will taste death.

So do not be afraid of those things that can kill the body. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both the body and soul.

It would be contemtous for one to believe they could steel themselves away from the sting of death, as the tent that they now embody drags them closer to the grave. For flesh gives birth to flesh, but spirit gives birth to spirit.

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Hmmmm, in what way?

I did try to explain - simply. Didja not read the blue reply font text I posted?

Brother please be gentle with eastcoast...reading comprehension may not have been part of his curriculum.

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

I already explained it but il do it again, after all I just passed 4000 posts and I didn't get there by not posting.

you cant give "god" credit for everything good and at the same time disolve him of any bad for whatever reason, if it's true that whatever happens is because god does it, then you must accept that whatever bad that happens is also his fault, if I go to work tommorow and say I will accept all the good that happens around here is because of me, but anything that happens thats bad is not my fault they would laugh at me, it's cherry picking and trying to have it both ways, if god creates life and all the great things, then he is also responsible for adolph hitler and all the bad hitler did.

It has been brought up numerous times in this thread that God is not the author of sin. So how can it be His fault?

If you end up in Sheol as a result of poor decision that you make, would you want to blame God for that also?

Your arguements tend to show that you want free will or chose, yet on the other side you want to blame someone if your choices bring you bad consequences?

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by 30Cal

It has been brought up numerous times in this thread that God is not the author of sin. So how can it be His fault?

If you end up in Sheol as a result of poor decision that you make, would you want to blame God for that also?

Your arguements tend to show that you want free will or chose, yet on the other side you want to blame someone if your choices bring you bad consequences?

if it's not his fault for the bad things why does he get credit for the good things?

I am all for free will the more the better,free thinking, free science the more better really in my mind, I don't see the harm in more freedom.

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

if it's not his fault for the bad things why does he get credit for the good things?

I am all for free will the more the better,free thinking, free science the more better really in my mind, I don't see the harm in more freedom.

Yet in some of your previous post you want to blame Christians for slowing down progress, are they not allowed free choice also? Have they not contirbuted to discoveries in Science?

Do the research

http://www.rae.org/influsci.html

You use the terms good and bad quite frequently as if there is a division between the two. So please explain to me what does good mean to you? Is it the abscense of bad or is bad the abscense of good?

[great white whaler]

the human race well self distructed ,and giant black ants well rule the planet .

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by 30Cal

Yet in some of your previous post you want to blame Christians for slowing down progress, are they not allowed free choice also? Have they not contirbuted to discoveries in Science?

Do the research

http://www.rae.org/influsci.html

You use the terms good and bad quite frequently as if there is a division between the two. So please explain to me what does good mean to you? what is it? Is it the abscense of bad or bad the abscense of good?

you think religion has helped scientific research or hurt it overall?

good and bad are subjective to the individual.

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by great white whaler

the human race well self distructed ,and giant black ants well rule the planet .

We agree...the human will self destruct, should I say this the beauty of free will/choice . About the ants, I'll have to think about that one.

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

you think religion has helped scientific research or hurt it overall?

good and bad are subjective to the individual.

I would have to study it to a greater depth to come to a conclusion. Many things in history appear to be done in the name of religion. However, in many events it has been no more than a cloak of deception to either make people believe that it is a good cause, or to turn hatred towards something that actual may be good.

Do bad things happen to good people, who brings the bad and for what cause?

As darkness is the absence of light, maybe bad is the absence of good. But who is good? As you said that is subjective, so for the Christian would God not be good? Would you try to rob them of their choice?

Yes. good and bad are subjective, and measured according to ones foundation.

I would think that a foundation built on a rock, is safer and more reliable than a foundation built on sand? Would you not agree?

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Okay, thanks for asking.

Although we didn't have an exorcism per se in any of these cases, the believers in my families prayed, people in our churches prayed, a lot of other believers prayed, and 2 of my BIL's who had cancer don't have it today. My Mom has battled it on and off and right now she is declared cancer free and living life to the full. They are the only 3 in my family who've had cancer at a younger age and are doing great. There have been a few aged people who died with cancer in their bodies though - did the cancer do them in? It probably contributed to it, but when people are in their late 80's or 90's it's probably safe to say 'old age' got them.

Also, and I hope you are trying to be funny, but note that I never said it's the devil's fault.

I am seriously glad that some of your family is in remission; I don't think there is a family that has not been touched by cancer.

I do assume though, that regular medical (scientific based and researched) treatments occurred, or did they eschew them?

I was not being funny about the exorcisms; I know of at least one fundamentalist person who practices exorcisms through her church, claiming that she can cure mentally ill people by driving the devil out of them... seriously, I am not making that up.

THAT bothers the heck out of me!

[eastcoast]

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

creationist models are often criticized for being too vague to have any predictive value. A literal interpretation of the Flood story in Genesis, however, does imply certain physical consequences which can be tested against what we actually observe, and the implications of such an interpretation are investigated below. Some creationists provided even more detailed models, and these are also addressed (see especially sections 5 and 7).

References are listed at the end of each section.

Two kinds of flood model are not addressed here. First is the local flood. Genesis 6-8 can be interpreted as a homiletic story such that the "world" that was flooded was just the area that Noah knew. Creationists argue against the local flood model because it doesn't fit their own literalist preconceptions, but I know of no physical evidence contrary to such a model.

Second, the whole story can be dismissed as a series of supernatural miracles. There is no way to contradict such an argument. However, one must wonder about a God who reportedly does one thing and then arranges every bit of evidence to make it look like something else happened. It's entirely possible that a global flood occurred 4000 years ago or even last Thursday, and that God subsequently erased all the evidence, including our memories of it. But even if such stories are true, what's the point?

1. Building the Ark
Wood is not the best material for shipbuilding. It is not enough that a ship be built to hold together; it must also be sturdy enough that the changing stresses don't open gaps in its hull. Wood is simply not strong enough to prevent separation between the joints, especially in the heavy seas that the Ark would have encountered. The longest wooden ships in modern seas are about 300 feet, and these require reinforcing with iron straps and leak so badly they must be constantly pumped. The ark was 450 feet long [ Gen. 6:15]. Could an ark that size be made seaworthy?

2. Gathering the Animals
Bringing all kinds of animals together in the vicinity of the ark presents significant problems.

Could animals have traveled from elsewhere? If the animals traveled from other parts of the world, many of them would have faced extreme difficulties.

•Some, like sloths and penguins, can't travel overland very well at all.
•Some, like koalas and many insects, require a special diet. How did they bring it along?
•Some cave-dwelling arthropods can't survive in less than 100% relative humidity.
•Some, like dodos, must have lived on islands. If they didn't, they would have been easy prey for other animals. When mainland species like rats or pigs are introduced to islands, they drive many indigenous species to extinction. Those species would not have been able to survive such competition if they lived where mainland species could get at them before the Flood.
Could animals have all lived near Noah? Some creationists suggest that the animals need not have traveled far to reach the Ark; a moderate climate could have made it possible for all of them to live nearby all along. However, this proposal makes matters even worse. The last point above would have applied not only to island species, but to almost all species. Competition between species would have driven most of them to extinction.

There is a reason why Gila monsters, yaks, and quetzals don't all live together in a temperate climate. They can't survive there, at least not for long without special care. Organisms have preferred environments outside of which they are at a deadly disadvantage. Most extinctions are caused by destroying the organisms' preferred environments. The creationists who propose all the species living together in a uniform climate are effectively proposing the destruction of all environments but one. Not many species could have survived that.

How was the Ark loaded? Getting all the animals aboard the Ark presents logistical problems which, while not impossible, are highly impractical. Noah had only seven days to load the Ark ( Gen. 7:4-10). If only 15764 animals were aboard the Ark (see section 3), one animal must have been loaded every 38 seconds, without letup. Since there were likely more animals to load, the time pressures would have been even worse.

3. Fitting the Animals Aboard
To determine how much space is required for animals, we must first determine what is a kind, how many kinds were aboard the ark, and how big they were.

What is a kind? Creationists themselves can't decide on an answer to this question; they propose criteria ranging from species to order, and I have even seen an entire kingdom (bacteria) suggested as a single kind. Woodmorappe (p. 5-7) compromises by using genus as a kind. However, on the ark "kind" must have meant something closer to species for three reasons:

•For purposes of naming animals, the people who live among them distinguish between them (that is, give them different names) at roughly the species level. [Gould, 1980]
•The Biblical "kind," according to most interpretations, implies reproductive separateness. On the ark, the purpose of gathering different kinds was to preserve them by later reproduction. Species, by definition, is the level at which animals are reproductively distinct.
•The Flood, according to models, was fairly recent. There simply wouldn't have been time enough to accumulate the number of mutations necessary for the diversity of species we see within many genera today.
What kinds were aboard the ark? Woodmorappe and Whitcomb & Morris arbitrarily exclude all animals except mammals, birds, and reptiles. However, many other animals, particularly land arthropods, must also have been on the ark for two reasons:

•The Bible says so. Gen. 7:8 puts on the ark all creatures that move along the ground, with no further qualifications. Lev. 11:42 includes arthropods (creatures that "walk on many feet") in such a category.
•They couldn't survive outside. Gen. 7:21-23 says every land creature not aboard the ark perished. And indeed, not one insect species in a thousand could survive for half a year on the vegetation mats proposed by some creationists. Most other land arthropods, snails, slugs, earthworms, etc. would also have to be on the ark to survive.
Were dinosaurs and other extinct animals on the ark? According to the Bible, Noah took samples of all animals alive at the time of the Flood. If, as creationists claim, all fossil-bearing strata were deposited by the Flood, then all the animals which became fossils were alive then. Therefore all extinct land animals had representatives aboard the ark.

It is also worth pointing out that the number of extinct species is undoubtedly greater than the number of known extinct species. New genera of dinosaurs have been discovered at a nearly constant rate for more than a century, and there's no indication that the rate of discovery will fall off in the near future.

Were the animals aboard the ark mature? Woodmorappe gets his animals to fit only by taking juvenile pairs of everything weighing more than 22 lbs. as an adult. However, it is more likely that Noah would have brought adults aboard:

•The Bible (Gen. 7:2) speaks of "the male and his mate," indicating that the animals were at sexual maturity.
•Many animals require the care of adults to teach them behaviors they need for survival. If brought aboard as juveniles, these animals wouldn't have survived.
The last point does not apply to all animals. However, the animals don't need parental care tend to be animals that mature quickly, and thus would be close to adult size after a year of growth anyway.

How many clean animals were on the ark? The Bible says either seven or fourteen (it's ambiguous) of each kind of clean animal was aboard. It defines clean animals essentially as ruminants, a suborder which includes about 69 recent genera, 192 recent species [Wilson & Reeder, 1993], and probably a comparable number of extinct genera and species. That is a small percentage of the total number of species, but ruminants are among the largest mammals, so their bulk is significant.

Woodmorappe (p. 8-9) gets around the problem by citing Jewish tradition which gives only 13 domestic genera as clean. He then calculates that this would increase the total animal mass by 2-3% and decides that this amount is small enough that he can ignore it completely. However, even Jewish sources admit that this contradicts the unambiguous word of the Bible. [Steinsaltz, 1976, p. 187]

The number and size of clean birds is small enough to disregard entirely, but the Bible at one point (Gen. 7:3) says seven of all kinds of birds were aboard.

So, could they all fit? It is important to take the size of animals into account when considering how much space they would occupy because the greatest number of species occurs in the smallest animals. Woodmorappe performed such an analysis and came to the conclusion that the animals would take up 47% of the ark. In addition, he determines that about 10% of the ark was needed for food (compacted to take as little space as possible) and 9.4% for water (assuming no evaporation or wastage). At least 25% of the space would have been needed for corridors and bracing. Thus, increasing the quantity of animals by more than about 5% would overload the ark.

However, Woodmorappe makes several questionable and invalid assumptions. Here's how the points discussed above affect his analysis. Table 1 shows Woodmorappe's analysis and some additional calculations.


•Collecting each species instead of each genus would increase the number of individuals three- to fourfold. The most speciose groups tend to be the smaller animals, though, so the total mass would be approximately doubled or tripled.
•Collecting all land animals instead of just mammals, birds, and reptiles would have insignificant impact on the space required, since those animals, though plentiful, are so small. (The problems come when you try to care for them all.)
•Leaving off the long-extinct animals would free considerable space. Woodmorappe doesn't say how many of the animals in his calculations are known only from fossils, but it is apparently 50-70% of them, including most of the large ones. However, since he took only juveniles of the large animals, leaving off all the dinosaurs etc. would probably not free more than 80% of the space. On the other hand, collecting all extinct animals in addition to just the known ones would increase the load by an unknown but probably substantial amount.
•Loading adults instead of juveniles as small as Woodmorappe uses would increase the load 13- to 50-fold.
•Including extra clean animals would increase the load by 1.5-3% if only the 13 traditional domestic ruminants are considered, but by 14-28% if all ruminants are considered clean.
In conclusion, an ark of the size specified in the Bible would not be large enough to carry a cargo of animals and food sufficient to repopulate the earth, especially if animals that are now extinct were required to be aboard.

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by avb3

I am seriously glad that some of your family is in remission; I don't think there is a family that has not been touched by cancer.

I do assume though, that regular medical (scientific based and researched) treatments occurred, or did they eschew them?

I was not being funny about the exorcisms; I know of at least one fundamentalist person who practices exorcisms through her church, claiming that she can cure mentally ill people by driving the devil out of them... seriously, I am not making that up.

THAT bothers the heck out of me!

do they pray away the gay?

[gunmum]

Can I just commend you people on something? As you know, I'm learning so much on this thread. I just wanted to say that I'm so so very impressed with the high level of respect that you have for each other on this often heated topic! What a pleasure, thanks Carry on!

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by avb3

I am seriously glad that some of your family is in remission; I don't think there is a family that has not been touched by cancer.

I do assume though, that regular medical (scientific based and researched) treatments occurred, or did they eschew them?

I was not being funny about the exorcisms; I know of at least one fundamentalist person who practices exorcisms through her church, claiming that she can cure mentally ill people by driving the devil out of them... seriously, I am not making that up.

THAT bothers the heck out of me!

Likewise, I've seen many people engrossed with pushing demons out of other people, and I have question who really has the demon? It's unfortunate that many get caught or entangled in worrying about the devil, rather than focusing on the author of their salvation.

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

creationist models are often criticized for being too vague to have any predictive value...if animals that are now extinct were required to be aboard.

Did you read any of the links that were previously provided? There is always two sides to a debate or argument.

Much of what you have posted, you'll likely see it countered here:

http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...inningTOC.html

ie. the flood, the ark, ....etc.

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by 30Cal

Did you read any of the links that were previously provided? There is always two sides to a debate or argument.

Much of what you have posted, you'll likely see it countered here:

http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...inningTOC.html

ie. the flood, the ark, ....etc.

like I have said pages ago there can only be one truth, and all the evidence actual physical evidence points toward there never being an arc, what creatinists have is "god said it so it must be true" which is not an argument it's an opinion.

[30Cal]

The truth is, we will all go on to our perspective ends in order to fully receive any rewards that might await us. Unfortunately, the end result may not be the same for us all. Yet, I earnestly hope that the final results would be favourable to all, although that would not be realistic for me to believe. Therefore, since we all share a tiny space on this stone called earth, may we all learn to respect the choices each other make, and in doing so respect a gift that we all have recieved. Even if that means we chose not to agree.

Time for bed...hope to see you all back tomorrow, unless for some good reason I have to return home.

Goodnight and May God Bless.

[Mistagin]

Originally Posted by avb3

I am seriously glad that some of your family is in remission; I don't think there is a family that has not been touched by cancer.
That's for sure!

I do assume though, that regular medical (scientific based and researched) treatments occurred, or did they eschew them?
You assume correctly. Of course they took advantage of medical technologies. Why wouldn't we? God has given us the gift of science to help us, and I believe He uses medical treatments and practitioners in the healing process.

I was not being funny about the exorcisms; I know of at least one fundamentalist person who practices exorcisms through her church, claiming that she can cure mentally ill people by driving the devil out of them... seriously, I am not making that up.
I too know of some folks who make similar claims, most cases bother me about it too - that's not a realm to mess around in!

THAT bothers the heck out of me!

I could tell you a story about a personal experience of being in the presence of a man I believe was under the influence of a demonic power. He verbally attacked me one day, and what I saw in his eyes was awful scary! I still get the shivers when I think about it.