Forum
»
Practicing Christians, it's our duty to spread the word of Jesus, which means
09-28-2022, 06:03 PM
-
#181
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
-
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2006
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,385
- Rep Power: 316746
-
-
Originally Posted By Basiliskboy⏩
This.Why would you want to live for eternity it’s someone you rejected here during your time on earth?
I don't let strangers/people I do not know into my house. People had their entire lives to come to know God, they refused..they made their choice, they have NO ONE to blame but themselves.
I live in San Diego and have a place in Big Bear, anyone that wants to know me can PM..nohomo, married 18 yrs now.
09-28-2022, 06:04 PM
-
#182
- georgeenoob
- Registered User
-
- georgeenoob
- Registered User
- Join Date: Feb 2010
- Age: 32
- Posts: 5,226
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By PissantSoldier⏩
Oh wow they mourn for 2 seconds then go about their day.Elephants mourn. As do lots of other animals. And that's from our limited understanding of the animals we study.
lol @ love though, your God lacks it so I suppose he's soulless too? Is that right?
lol @ love though, your God lacks it so I suppose he's soulless too? Is that right?
Also, want to know how I know God loves us? Cause he created us. The same reason a mother wouldn't want an abortion. The same reason a mother discovers her unborn child will have a heart defect and mortgages her house to pay for his existence.
09-28-2022, 06:07 PM
-
#183
- PissantSoldier
- ἀρχιεπίσ
-
- PissantSoldier
- ἀρχιεπίσ
- Join Date: Dec 2011
- Location: New York, United States
- Age: 39
- Posts: 9,826
- Rep Power: 32032
-
-
Originally Posted By Paul
What are you saying "this" for? The point being made is that God is unjust.This.
I don't let strangers/people I do not know into my house. People had their entire lives to come to know God, they refused..they made their choice, they have NO ONE to blame but themselves.
I live in San Diego and have a place in Big Bear, anyone that wants to know me can PM..nohomo, married 18 yrs now.
I don't let strangers/people I do not know into my house. People had their entire lives to come to know God, they refused..they made their choice, they have NO ONE to blame but themselves.
I live in San Diego and have a place in Big Bear, anyone that wants to know me can PM..nohomo, married 18 yrs now.
Would I want to live and serve and sing praises to the demiurge knowing its nature? No thanks Jeff, just kill me. The mere fact that it tortures you for eternity reveals a lot of its nature, including the lack of love.
People have their entire lives to come to know God, and many know many different Gods. Many are sincere and find different Gods to worship. It's hogwash.
Originally Posted By georgeenoob⏩
Nope, they mourn for years and go back to bones and where bones used to be.Oh wow they mourn for 2 seconds then go about their day.
Also, want to know how I know God loves us? Cause he created us. The same reason a mother wouldn't want an abortion. The same reason a mother discovers her unborn child will have a heart defect and mortgages her house to pay for his existence.
Also, want to know how I know God loves us? Cause he created us. The same reason a mother wouldn't want an abortion. The same reason a mother discovers her unborn child will have a heart defect and mortgages her house to pay for his existence.
Your Demiurge created you to worship him. It wasn't out of love for us. It was out of love for himself.
Your Demiurge is simply playing with his toys. He doesn't care, nor does he have any compassion or empathy for you or a starving child in some failed state.
++Positive Crew++
Illuminati Crew
Audrey Hepburn Crew
09-28-2022, 06:09 PM
-
#184
- milfmanmilk
- Banned
-
- milfmanmilk
- Banned
- Join Date: Aug 2022
- Posts: 3,208
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By georgeenoob⏩
Oh wow they mourn for 2 seconds then go about their day.
Also, want to know how I know God loves us? Cause he created us. The same reason a mother wouldn't want an abortion. The same reason a mother discovers her unborn child will have a heart defect and mortgages her house to pay for his existence.
Also, want to know how I know God loves us? Cause he created us. The same reason a mother wouldn't want an abortion. The same reason a mother discovers her unborn child will have a heart defect and mortgages her house to pay for his existence.
Elephants >>> You and your gay demiurge.
09-28-2022, 06:11 PM
-
#185
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
-
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2006
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,385
- Rep Power: 316746
-
-
Originally Posted By PissantSoldier⏩
He is not unjust at all. You have had your entire life to come to know Him, even now. You refused/refusing, so you have no one to blame but yourself.What are you saying "this" for? The point being made is that God is unjust.
Would I want to live and serve and sing praises to the demiurge knowing its nature? No thanks Jeff, just kill me. The mere fact that it tortures you for eternity reveals a lot of its nature, including the lack of love.
People have their entire lives to come to know God, and many know many different Gods. Many are sincere and find different Gods to worship. It's hogwash.
Nope, they mourn for years and go back to bones and where bones used to be.
Your Demiurge created you to worship him. It wasn't out of love for us. It was out of love for himself.
Would I want to live and serve and sing praises to the demiurge knowing its nature? No thanks Jeff, just kill me. The mere fact that it tortures you for eternity reveals a lot of its nature, including the lack of love.
People have their entire lives to come to know God, and many know many different Gods. Many are sincere and find different Gods to worship. It's hogwash.
Nope, they mourn for years and go back to bones and where bones used to be.
Your Demiurge created you to worship him. It wasn't out of love for us. It was out of love for himself.
Don't shift to the.."other people believe different gods"..I assure you, God will deal with them accordingly, as for you, you have no excuse, so stop trying to justify as though you do.
Can I ask your first name? srs
09-28-2022, 06:14 PM
-
#186
The biggest mistake that atheists make is attempting to put God in to a box that suits them. We have take the good and the bad and understand some things cannot be changed by humans, so instead, Christ teaches to focus on the things we can’t change.
This is where the secular groups fall hard. What God controls and what we control gives a more clear, moral picture of what we should not be attempting to dabble in. Socialism, for instance, which is yet another atheist ideology.
This is where the secular groups fall hard. What God controls and what we control gives a more clear, moral picture of what we should not be attempting to dabble in. Socialism, for instance, which is yet another atheist ideology.
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
09-28-2022, 06:16 PM
-
#187
- georgeenoob
- Registered User
-
- georgeenoob
- Registered User
- Join Date: Feb 2010
- Age: 32
- Posts: 5,226
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By PissantSoldier⏩
This is between you and God. Any guy claiming they have all his intentions figured out is just as arrogant as you are.So you've got no justification for his madness.
Demiurge, like I said. He's a retarded child that created beings for his own selfish interests. If whatever it is exists, it doesn't care about you or any other human. It's a jealous, petty God and one that seems all too human.
Demiurge, like I said. He's a retarded child that created beings for his own selfish interests. If whatever it is exists, it doesn't care about you or any other human. It's a jealous, petty God and one that seems all too human.
I'll leave you with this:
God is merciful and forgiving. If you were dealt a bad hand in life do not be quick to point the blame. It is an obstacle to show strength with humility. God does not inflict upon us what we cannot overcome. Even if you're atheist, being a virtuous, selfless person will be met with a place by God. Cause even though accepting Jesus can be argued by many as the only way, God is merciful at the end of the day.
09-28-2022, 06:19 PM
-
#188
- Basiliskboy
- Registered User
-
- Basiliskboy
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2016
- Age: 34
- Posts: 4,064
- Rep Power: 24299
-
-
Originally Posted By Paul
This.He is not unjust at all. You have had your entire life to come to know Him, even now. You refused/refusing, so you have no one to blame but yourself.
Don't shift to the.."other people believe different gods"..I assure you, God will deal with them accordingly, as for you, you have no excuse, so stop trying to justify as though you do.
Can I ask your first name? srs
Don't shift to the.."other people believe different gods"..I assure you, God will deal with them accordingly, as for you, you have no excuse, so stop trying to justify as though you do.
Can I ask your first name? srs
> God gives you instructions on how to enter his kingdom. By believing his only son Jesus Christ came and lived a sinless perfect life and died for your sins past and present and you must repent.
> you reject the gospel
> you claim God is unjust for having rules for his Holy kingdom.
I beg you to take a step back and observe the lie you’re being told. How you’re operating in the flesh and trying to justify your fleshes desires by rejecting the commandments of God to deny yourself.
We’ve all been there. Take your free gift and be free from the chains that bind you
09-28-2022, 06:22 PM
-
#189
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By georgeenoob⏩
Because it's written in a story does not mean it's true. If that's the case, then Thanos is ruling the cosmos and Galactus is devouring planets because I read it in some comic book. With that out of the way, no the myth of Adam and Eve as a first pair of humans is not how humanity started, it contradicts basic science. Much religious doctrine is based on this incorrect notion.Wrong.
When God created man, he did so in his image. Adam and Eve were created in this image. But along came Satan who tempted eve with sin, who then tempted Adam with sin. Why would God create Adam and Eve in hs great image but succumb to sin? Because God wants us to distinguish evil and not be oblivious to it.
When God created man, he did so in his image. Adam and Eve were created in this image. But along came Satan who tempted eve with sin, who then tempted Adam with sin. Why would God create Adam and Eve in hs great image but succumb to sin? Because God wants us to distinguish evil and not be oblivious to it.
Originally Posted By georgeenoob⏩
There was a (very) long stretch of time where animals roamed the lands and waters of earth, but no humans. If you go back far enough it was prokaryotic life (single celled organisms without a nucleus). According to you, none of that life had souls (which I agree with, since the term isnt even properly defined much less evidenced), but presumably you think souls exist now in humans. When exactly did this 'soul' insert itself- down to the precise date, perhaps 5,457,832 BC on July 12, at 4:34 AM local time into this gradual transition of species on earth? And what the fuk does that even mean? (asking this rhetorically since there is no way anyone could answer this from evidence or even make sense of the question- it is nonsensical).Animals have no souls. Let me put it this way, what's the main thing that distinguishes us from animals? Love. And all of love can be traced to a maker.
I love animals too, but yea, no souls.
I love animals too, but yea, no souls.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
09-28-2022, 06:30 PM
-
#190
Anti-Christian’s change the argument from the product of the ideology, to whether God exists. They cannot argue based on the merits of the results, the outcome of the practice. If something works, why try so hard to disprove it? Because if they admit it creates good outcomes, they have to admit that their own ideology likely won’t match the moral results.
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
09-28-2022, 06:37 PM
-
#191
- mp83
- i need a tan
-
- mp83
- i need a tan
- Join Date: Dec 2011
- Location: Wisconsin, United States
- Posts: 12,073
- Rep Power: 97658
-
-
Originally Posted By Paul
If you actually read the bible, you'd see that Democrats are far more aligned with what Jesus actually said. Republican Jesus is an a$$hole.Yes, no one chooses to suffer, unfortunately we all chose to sin, and as a result, we suffer, and we have created a world that enables suffering for those that chose so or not.
The Republican Party is a mess..Most Christians are Conservative..and thus seek to "conserve" the ideas and policies our forefathers set upon when establishing this country. The Republican Party, as misguided as it is, is one that most closely aligns with Conservatives.
The left is so far gone that it is just a joke now.
The Republican Party is a mess..Most Christians are Conservative..and thus seek to "conserve" the ideas and policies our forefathers set upon when establishing this country. The Republican Party, as misguided as it is, is one that most closely aligns with Conservatives.
The left is so far gone that it is just a joke now.
Originally Posted By Basiliskboy⏩
Your all powerful and all merciful god chooses to do nothing about those things. Why should we worship someone who allows that?False equivalencies.
Just because humans don’t choose terminal illnesses doesn’t mean we all don’t equally have a chance of getting one even at birth or a young age in this fallen world.
You’re trying to blame God for man’s actions of inslaving other groups of people? What logical sense does that make? If anything it points to your inherent God giving understanding of what’s right and wrong the difference between ideal perfect order and a broken world tainted by sin.
Common tactic of labeling everyone who claims to be Christian as Christian. Maybe you’re not aware but Jesus says in the Bible that we will know true Christian’s by their fruits of the spirit meaning their actions..
If someone claims to be Christian but has a mega church that doesn’t give back to the community and owns 3 private jets that’s bad fruit
If a Christian man has been living a life of service in Africa for over 10 years providing water for the needy could that be considered good fruit? Why don’t you guys ever bring up these Christian’s in your arguments?
Just because humans don’t choose terminal illnesses doesn’t mean we all don’t equally have a chance of getting one even at birth or a young age in this fallen world.
You’re trying to blame God for man’s actions of inslaving other groups of people? What logical sense does that make? If anything it points to your inherent God giving understanding of what’s right and wrong the difference between ideal perfect order and a broken world tainted by sin.
Common tactic of labeling everyone who claims to be Christian as Christian. Maybe you’re not aware but Jesus says in the Bible that we will know true Christian’s by their fruits of the spirit meaning their actions..
If someone claims to be Christian but has a mega church that doesn’t give back to the community and owns 3 private jets that’s bad fruit
If a Christian man has been living a life of service in Africa for over 10 years providing water for the needy could that be considered good fruit? Why don’t you guys ever bring up these Christian’s in your arguments?
And why should I believe in him when he gives zero evidence of his existence?
{Misc Fisherman Crew}
{Misc Investing Crew}
09-28-2022, 06:38 PM
-
#192
- PutinItInYoGirl
- Banned
-
- PutinItInYoGirl
- Banned
- Join Date: Sep 2022
- Posts: 822
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By Kraken⏩
It doesn't work though. If we accept the bible's ideas behind origins of life or the universe, we are left scratching our heads at the fossil record, the age of the universe, relativity, etc. It's fine to maybe go along and cherrypick some nice aspects of Christianity and ignore the rest. That's what most do. But to take it as the fundamental and literal truth about the world would lead to many absurdities.Anti-Christian’s change the argument from the product of the ideology, to whether God exists. They cannot argue based on the merits of the results, the outcome of the practice. If something works, why try so hard to disprove it? Because if they admit it creates good outcomes, they have to admit that their own ideology likely won’t match the moral results.
09-28-2022, 06:40 PM
-
#193
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
-
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2006
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,385
- Rep Power: 316746
-
-
Originally Posted By mp83⏩
Democrats do not align with what Jesus/God taught...whatsoever. If you don't work, you don't eat. Again, Conservatives most closely align with a Theocracy...Republicans are typically aligned with Conservatives..see Kristi NoemIf you actually read the bible, you'd see that Democrats are far more aligned with what Jesus actually said. Republican Jesus is an a$$hole.
Your all powerful and all merciful god chooses to do nothing about those things. Why should we worship someone who allows that?
And why should I believe in him when he gives zero evidence of his existence?
Your all powerful and all merciful god chooses to do nothing about those things. Why should we worship someone who allows that?
And why should I believe in him when he gives zero evidence of his existence?
09-28-2022, 06:42 PM
-
#194
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
-
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2006
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,385
- Rep Power: 316746
-
-
Originally Posted By PutinItInYoGirl⏩
The fossil record aligns with the Bible.It doesn't work though. If we accept the bible's ideas behind origins of life or the universe, we are left scratching our heads at the fossil record, the age of the universe, relativity, etc. It's fine to maybe go along and cherrypick some nice aspects of Christianity and ignore the rest. That's what most do. But to take it as the fundamental and literal truth about the world would lead to many absurdities.
“The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.” [ J.E. O’Rourke,
American Journal of Science 1976, 276:51]
“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”
Rastall, R. H., “Geology,” Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 10 (1949) University of London. P. 168
“Paleontologists cannot operate this way. There is no way simply to look at a fossil and say how old it is unless you know the age of the rocks it comes from.”[date the fossil by the rock]
Eldredge, Niles
“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists
O’Rourke, J. E
Evolution is based on two faulty assumptions:
1. mutations make something new and 2. natural selection makes it survive and take over the population. Evolution is a religion of death not life.
“No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.”
Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms 1977, p. 88
They rearrange existing information but do not increase genetic complexity
“In all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information. . . . All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it.”
Lee Spetner, Not By Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Judaica Press, 1997), 131, 138.
“Natural selection may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.”
Daniel Brooks “A downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240
“Natural selection can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.”
Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p. 516.
Survival of the fittest does not explain the arrival of the fittest!
By the way: “Survival of the fittest” is a tautology.
Q. Why did it survive? A. Because it is the fittest.
Q. How do you know it is the fittest? A. Because it survived.
^ circular reasoning
if survival of the strongest or fittest was real, then humans would'nt even exist today. There are many animals in the animal kingdom much stronger and fitter than the average human. or even the strongest human.
09-28-2022, 06:50 PM
-
#195
- mp83
- i need a tan
-
- mp83
- i need a tan
- Join Date: Dec 2011
- Location: Wisconsin, United States
- Posts: 12,073
- Rep Power: 97658
-
-
Originally Posted By Paul
Republicans are the ones who hate minorities, want to tax the poor more, and want poor people to go without healthcare. Jesus would absolutely not be okay with that. Jesus never said "if you are unable to work, you should starve". He said the opposite.Democrats do not align with what Jesus/God taught...whatsoever. If you don't work, you don't eat. Again, Conservatives most closely align with a Theocracy...Republicans are typically aligned with Conservatives..see Kristi Noem
I think you need to read the bible that you thump more. Then again, that's common from you bible thumping hypocrites
{Misc Fisherman Crew}
{Misc Investing Crew}
09-28-2022, 06:53 PM
-
#196
Originally Posted By PutinItInYoGirl⏩
This is projection. Try again.It doesn't work though. If we accept the bible's ideas behind origins of life or the universe, we are left scratching our heads at the fossil record, the age of the universe, relativity, etc. It's fine to maybe go along and cherrypick some nice aspects of Christianity and ignore the rest. That's what most do. But to take it as the fundamental and literal truth about the world would lead to many absurdities.
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
09-28-2022, 06:54 PM
-
#197
- PutinItInYoGirl
- Banned
-
- PutinItInYoGirl
- Banned
- Join Date: Sep 2022
- Posts: 822
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By Paul
1) We use radioactive dating to determine the ages of rocks and subsequently fossils.The fossil record aligns with the Bible.
“The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.” [ J.E. O’Rourke,
American Journal of Science 1976, 276:51]
“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”
Rastall, R. H., “Geology,” Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 10 (1949) University of London. P. 168
“Paleontologists cannot operate this way. There is no way simply to look at a fossil and say how old it is unless you know the age of the rocks it comes from.”[date the fossil by the rock]
Eldredge, Niles
“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists
O’Rourke, J. E
Evolution is based on two faulty assumptions:
1. mutations make something new and 2. natural selection makes it survive and take over the population. Evolution is a religion of death not life.
“No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.”
Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms 1977, p. 88
They rearrange existing information but do not increase genetic complexity
“In all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information. . . . All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it.”
Lee Spetner, Not By Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Judaica Press, 1997), 131, 138.
“Natural selection may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.”
Daniel Brooks “A downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240
“Natural selection can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.”
Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p. 516.
Survival of the fittest does not explain the arrival of the fittest!
By the way: “Survival of the fittest” is a tautology.
Q. Why did it survive? A. Because it is the fittest.
Q. How do you know it is the fittest? A. Because it survived.
^ circular reasoning
if survival of the strongest or fittest was real, then humans would'nt even exist today. There are many animals in the animal kingdom much stronger and fitter than the average human. or even the strongest human.
“The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.” [ J.E. O’Rourke,
American Journal of Science 1976, 276:51]
“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”
Rastall, R. H., “Geology,” Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 10 (1949) University of London. P. 168
“Paleontologists cannot operate this way. There is no way simply to look at a fossil and say how old it is unless you know the age of the rocks it comes from.”[date the fossil by the rock]
Eldredge, Niles
“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists
O’Rourke, J. E
Evolution is based on two faulty assumptions:
1. mutations make something new and 2. natural selection makes it survive and take over the population. Evolution is a religion of death not life.
“No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.”
Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms 1977, p. 88
They rearrange existing information but do not increase genetic complexity
“In all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information. . . . All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it.”
Lee Spetner, Not By Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Judaica Press, 1997), 131, 138.
“Natural selection may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.”
Daniel Brooks “A downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240
“Natural selection can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.”
Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p. 516.
Survival of the fittest does not explain the arrival of the fittest!
By the way: “Survival of the fittest” is a tautology.
Q. Why did it survive? A. Because it is the fittest.
Q. How do you know it is the fittest? A. Because it survived.
^ circular reasoning
if survival of the strongest or fittest was real, then humans would'nt even exist today. There are many animals in the animal kingdom much stronger and fitter than the average human. or even the strongest human.
2) Evolution is not based on those assumptions. Evolution is based on the assumption that mutations change genetic material (obvious from the chemistry), that genetic material is expressed as a phenotype in individuals (obvious from the biology), and that individuals have differential reproductive success due to their phenotypes (again obvious). The last link is simply inheritance of genetic information in offspring, which we again get from biology. Put all of that together, and you clearly have evolution under natural selection. Over time, allele frequencies in populations will change in response to selection pressures.
A lot of the quotes you are linking are flat out false.
That last one is a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument. That which survived was fit by definition. There is no circle. The question of "why did it survive" is pretty nonsensical scientifically, but would be answered as "because the laws of physics are as they are".
It is amazing that you directly attack so many aspects of science just to reaffirm your biblical view. You even go so far as to dispute the age of the universe, nuclear physics, evolution, stellar astrophysics, and other aspects of science.
09-28-2022, 06:59 PM
-
#198
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
-
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2006
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,385
- Rep Power: 316746
-
-
Originally Posted By PutinItInYoGirl⏩
1) Radioactive dating is highly flawed, MORE than happy to get into that1) We use radioactive dating to determine the ages of rocks and subsequently fossils.
2) Evolution is not based on those assumptions. Evolution is based on the assumption that mutations change genetic material (obvious from the chemistry), that genetic material is expressed as a phenotype in individuals (obvious from the biology), and that individuals have differential reproductive success due to their phenotypes (again obvious). The last link is simply inheritance of genetic information in offspring, which we again get from biology. Put all of that together, and you clearly have evolution under natural selection. Over time, allele frequencies in populations will change in response to selection pressures.
A lot of the quotes you are linking are flat out false.
That last one is a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument. That which survived was fit by definition. There is no circle. The question of "why did it survive" is pretty nonsensical scientifically, but would be answered as "because the laws of physics are as they are".
2) Evolution is not based on those assumptions. Evolution is based on the assumption that mutations change genetic material (obvious from the chemistry), that genetic material is expressed as a phenotype in individuals (obvious from the biology), and that individuals have differential reproductive success due to their phenotypes (again obvious). The last link is simply inheritance of genetic information in offspring, which we again get from biology. Put all of that together, and you clearly have evolution under natural selection. Over time, allele frequencies in populations will change in response to selection pressures.
A lot of the quotes you are linking are flat out false.
That last one is a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument. That which survived was fit by definition. There is no circle. The question of "why did it survive" is pretty nonsensical scientifically, but would be answered as "because the laws of physics are as they are".
2) Again, no change of species. Much of what is usually attributed to mutations in the nature is simply adaptation, and that adaptation has today a name, EPIGENETICS. It is a system that does not change the DNA, it regulates gene-expression and does not need those millions of years to do it. In fact a good example of epigenetic adaptation are the Galapagos finches. It was supposed until recently that changes in the size and form of their beaks required time periods typical to the Darwinian explanation, observations have however confirmed that the changes occur continuously (as rapidly is in a couple of years) and are reversible.
09-28-2022, 07:02 PM
-
#199
Originally Posted By Paul
My interpretation of “strongest” is not restricted to pure strength. For instance, humans created weapons that they could use in their hands. They created an equalizer for strength, and thus became the strongest. Same with women. Women learned how to use weapons, including firearms, which potentially make them “stronger“ than a man.The fossil record aligns with the Bible.
“The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.” [ J.E. O’Rourke,
American Journal of Science 1976, 276:51]
“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”
Rastall, R. H., “Geology,” Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 10 (1949) University of London. P. 168
“Paleontologists cannot operate this way. There is no way simply to look at a fossil and say how old it is unless you know the age of the rocks it comes from.”[date the fossil by the rock]
Eldredge, Niles
“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists
O’Rourke, J. E
Evolution is based on two faulty assumptions:
1. mutations make something new and 2. natural selection makes it survive and take over the population. Evolution is a religion of death not life.
“No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.”
Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms 1977, p. 88
They rearrange existing information but do not increase genetic complexity
“In all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information. . . . All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it.”
Lee Spetner, Not By Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Judaica Press, 1997), 131, 138.
“Natural selection may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.”
Daniel Brooks “A downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240
“Natural selection can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.”
Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p. 516.
Survival of the fittest does not explain the arrival of the fittest!
By the way: “Survival of the fittest” is a tautology.
Q. Why did it survive? A. Because it is the fittest.
Q. How do you know it is the fittest? A. Because it survived.
^ circular reasoning
if survival of the strongest or fittest was real, then humans would'nt even exist today. There are many animals in the animal kingdom much stronger and fitter than the average human. or even the strongest human.
“The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.” [ J.E. O’Rourke,
American Journal of Science 1976, 276:51]
“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”
Rastall, R. H., “Geology,” Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 10 (1949) University of London. P. 168
“Paleontologists cannot operate this way. There is no way simply to look at a fossil and say how old it is unless you know the age of the rocks it comes from.”[date the fossil by the rock]
Eldredge, Niles
“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists
O’Rourke, J. E
Evolution is based on two faulty assumptions:
1. mutations make something new and 2. natural selection makes it survive and take over the population. Evolution is a religion of death not life.
“No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.”
Pierre-Paul Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms 1977, p. 88
They rearrange existing information but do not increase genetic complexity
“In all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information. . . . All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it.”
Lee Spetner, Not By Chance!: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Judaica Press, 1997), 131, 138.
“Natural selection may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.”
Daniel Brooks “A downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240
“Natural selection can act only on those biologic properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptational needs.”
Parasitology, 6th ed. Lea & Febiger, p. 516.
Survival of the fittest does not explain the arrival of the fittest!
By the way: “Survival of the fittest” is a tautology.
Q. Why did it survive? A. Because it is the fittest.
Q. How do you know it is the fittest? A. Because it survived.
^ circular reasoning
if survival of the strongest or fittest was real, then humans would'nt even exist today. There are many animals in the animal kingdom much stronger and fitter than the average human. or even the strongest human.
Ingenuity and dexterity seemed to have trumped strength, that’s for sure.
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
09-28-2022, 07:03 PM
-
#200
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Virtually everything we learned from observed evidence over the last several hundred years has shown that humans dont occupy a special place in the universe or the grand scheme of things. On a rock orbiting one star out of countless trillions, in an incomprehensibly vast universe, existing for just 1 ten-thousandth of that's rock's duration. People ITT talk about being humble. Which is more humble, I wonder....
-humans originated from 'the beasts', and before that lower forms of life down to single-celled life (the evidenced reality)
-humans were created in the lofty image of a God
I was randomly thinking recently.....imagine if, after a very long time, eventually humans no longer existed as a species (after all life continues to evolve, although granted humanity in modern times doesnt face as much selective pressure from the environment). But there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the idea of humans continuing to speciate. There are various scenarios this could happen- maybe eventually a colony is created on Mars, lives in isolation for eons, apart from humans back on earth, and speciation happens. Or just for whatever reason, 50 million years from now, we see very different lifeforms roaming the earth from humans. Then the whole thing looks evenmoresilly. That would mean humans were just an intermediate link in the overall tree of life on earth. But the bible says this species was created in the image of a god, the son of god came down to earth in the form of that species, and the whole point of the world is based around that species. To the species from the future looking back, that would be like us looking back at, idk...some extinct species of dinosaur....Velociraptor mongoliensis, with some raptor god specifically intervening in that species, creating them in its image, with them the focus of everything. Seems really nonsensical. Basically ludicrous. Because of course...it is, as nothing here is based in evidence.
-humans originated from 'the beasts', and before that lower forms of life down to single-celled life (the evidenced reality)
-humans were created in the lofty image of a God
I was randomly thinking recently.....imagine if, after a very long time, eventually humans no longer existed as a species (after all life continues to evolve, although granted humanity in modern times doesnt face as much selective pressure from the environment). But there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the idea of humans continuing to speciate. There are various scenarios this could happen- maybe eventually a colony is created on Mars, lives in isolation for eons, apart from humans back on earth, and speciation happens. Or just for whatever reason, 50 million years from now, we see very different lifeforms roaming the earth from humans. Then the whole thing looks evenmoresilly. That would mean humans were just an intermediate link in the overall tree of life on earth. But the bible says this species was created in the image of a god, the son of god came down to earth in the form of that species, and the whole point of the world is based around that species. To the species from the future looking back, that would be like us looking back at, idk...some extinct species of dinosaur....Velociraptor mongoliensis, with some raptor god specifically intervening in that species, creating them in its image, with them the focus of everything. Seems really nonsensical. Basically ludicrous. Because of course...it is, as nothing here is based in evidence.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
09-28-2022, 07:05 PM
-
#201
- PutinItInYoGirl
- Banned
-
- PutinItInYoGirl
- Banned
- Join Date: Sep 2022
- Posts: 822
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By Paul
I don't get how you seriously believe this. We observe actual genetic changes and adaptation over time in populations. Why is it so hard to accept that eventual accumulation of these results in speciation?1) Radioactive dating is highly flawed, MORE than happy to get into that
2) Again, no change of species. Much of what is usually attributed to mutations in the nature is simply adaptation, and that adaptation has today a name, EPIGENETICS. It is a system that does not change the DNA, it regulates gene-expression and does not need those millions of years to do it. In fact a good example of epigenetic adaptation are the Galapagos finches. It was supposed until recently that changes in the size and form of their beaks required time periods typical to the Darwinian explanation, observations have however confirmed that the changes occur continuously (as rapidly is in a couple of years) and are reversible.
2) Again, no change of species. Much of what is usually attributed to mutations in the nature is simply adaptation, and that adaptation has today a name, EPIGENETICS. It is a system that does not change the DNA, it regulates gene-expression and does not need those millions of years to do it. In fact a good example of epigenetic adaptation are the Galapagos finches. It was supposed until recently that changes in the size and form of their beaks required time periods typical to the Darwinian explanation, observations have however confirmed that the changes occur continuously (as rapidly is in a couple of years) and are reversible.
You speak with such an obnoxious authoritative tone while having no training or understanding in the fields you talk about. You misuse basic words and misinterpret everything. Honestly, it's not even worth bothering with you. As NumbersGuy said, nothing you say is going to change anything. Science will carry on because it works, regardless of these objections which have been addressed ad nauseum for decades. There is not going to be any grand revelation that makes us think black holes don't exist, evolution doesn't happen, or that the Earth is flat or 5000 year old or however old you think it is.
09-28-2022, 07:10 PM
-
#202
- BlackJack619
- Registered User
-
- BlackJack619
- Registered User
- Join Date: Sep 2012
- Location: United States
- Posts: 17,066
- Rep Power: 143443
-
-
As soon as Jesus was baptized He was sent into the wilderness to overcome satan's temptation, He did it pretty quickly only took him 40 days.
Unfortunately those who genuinely become baptized undergo the same process of going to the wilderness to learn how to overcome the temptation of the the world/devil.
Some of use never make it out of the wilderness, some of us it take many many years. Some of us may be similar to Jesus.
The point I am making is that not all Christians are of the same spiritual maturity.
There can be instances where someone who grew up in the church is less spiritual mature than someone who just recently was born again.
The point I am trying to make can also be seen in the new mark wahlberg movie called father stu where he became a priest and was more spiritually mature than some of the others in his class who grew up in the church.
Spoiler!
Unfortunately those who genuinely become baptized undergo the same process of going to the wilderness to learn how to overcome the temptation of the the world/devil.
Some of use never make it out of the wilderness, some of us it take many many years. Some of us may be similar to Jesus.
The point I am making is that not all Christians are of the same spiritual maturity.
There can be instances where someone who grew up in the church is less spiritual mature than someone who just recently was born again.
The point I am trying to make can also be seen in the new mark wahlberg movie called father stu where he became a priest and was more spiritually mature than some of the others in his class who grew up in the church.
Spoiler!
this message is for those born again, to better help understand the process of sanctification
As
09-28-2022, 07:12 PM
-
#203
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
-
- Paul Kreul
- Registered User
- Join Date: Apr 2006
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,385
- Rep Power: 316746
-
-
Originally Posted By PutinItInYoGirl⏩
Give me one example of change of species from one to another..just one.I don't get how you seriously believe this. We observe actual genetic changes and adaptation over time in populations. Why is it so hard to accept that eventual accumulation of these results in speciation?
You speak with such an obnoxious authoritative tone while having no training or understanding in the fields you talk about. You misuse basic words and misinterpret everything. Honestly, it's not even worth bothering with you. As NumbersGuy said, nothing you say is going to change anything. Science will carry on because it works, regardless of these objections which have been addressed ad nauseum for decades. There is not going to be any grand revelation that makes us think black holes don't exist, evolution doesn't happen, or that the Earth is flat or 5000 year old or however old you think it is.
You speak with such an obnoxious authoritative tone while having no training or understanding in the fields you talk about. You misuse basic words and misinterpret everything. Honestly, it's not even worth bothering with you. As NumbersGuy said, nothing you say is going to change anything. Science will carry on because it works, regardless of these objections which have been addressed ad nauseum for decades. There is not going to be any grand revelation that makes us think black holes don't exist, evolution doesn't happen, or that the Earth is flat or 5000 year old or however old you think it is.
09-28-2022, 07:19 PM
-
#204
- Muzzlrpress
- Join Date: Jan 2011
- Location: United States
- Posts: 104,332
- Rep Power: 993953
-
-
Originally Posted By Paul
So God's bright idea for people not wanting to live with him os to make sure their only alternative is literally torture for literal eternity?This.
I don't let strangers/people I do not know into my house. People had their entire lives to come to know God, they refused..they made their choice, they have NO ONE to blame but themselves.
I live in San Diego and have a place in Big Bear, anyone that wants to know me can PM..nohomo, married 18 yrs now.
I don't let strangers/people I do not know into my house. People had their entire lives to come to know God, they refused..they made their choice, they have NO ONE to blame but themselves.
I live in San Diego and have a place in Big Bear, anyone that wants to know me can PM..nohomo, married 18 yrs now.
And this being supposedly loves us more than our parents? Do you have kids? I have a son. There is literally no scenario where I'd seek to literally torture him even for a little bit, let alone FOREVER.
And if my son rejects me, I have to look inward to understand why. To lash out at him would be petty, which is exactly what God is, because the petty humans that invented the concept of him could only create him through a petty, human lense. Notice how the God we're taught about isn't some monk whose above it all. No. 100% human emotion. Jealousy, pettiness, arrogance, envy. These aren't heavenly concepts that are beyond us, we understand them just fine. God of the Bible is just as much of a petty, unfair azzhole as any Greek God. He's as much of a dick as Zeus was.
Isn't it crazy how people will talk about all this infinite wisdom and love, but the ONLY text that's meant to be the text for us to learn about the one true God is completely opposite? People say one thing, but the Bible says something else entirely. God kills those literally born to the wrong people, gives his arbitrary favorites free reign to kill and rape the opposition, makes LITERAL bets with Satan (didn't he kick that guy out? Why would a Supreme being feel the NEED TO WIN A BET WITH THE LITERAL DEVIL?), tells a man to kill his son, KILLS EVERYONE ON EARTH EXCEPT FOR ONE FAMILY, etc..
Spare me the bs, we can all read. And if the Bible is wrong and God is not only misunderstood by real and actually all powerful, he doesn't need any help and is perfectly capable of making his case if he wants to. Until then, it's just a bunch of humans telling stories to other humans bending logic, reason, and even emotion to their whom to justify their blind faith in a being they believe exists and will never, ever see.
I'm back, bitches!
09-28-2022, 07:22 PM
-
#205
Originally Posted By Muzzlrpress⏩
your trying too hard to rationalize something that is out of the bounds of our own abilitiesSo God's bright idea for people not wanting to live with him os to make sure their only alternative is literally torture for literal eternity?
And this being supposedly loves us more than our parents? Do you have kids? I have a son. There is literally no scenario where I'd seek to literally torture him even for a little bit, let alone FOREVER.
And if my son rejects me, I have to look inward to understand why. To lash out at him would be petty, which is exactly what God is, because the petty humans that invented the concept of him could only create him through a petty, human lense. Notice how the God we're taught about isn't some monk whose above it all. No. 100% human emotion. Jealousy, pettiness, arrogance, envy. These aren't heavenly concepts that are beyond us, we understand them just fine. God of the Bible is just as much of a petty, unfair azzhole as any Greek God. He's as much of a dick as Zeus was.
Isn't it crazy how people will talk about all this infinite wisdom and love, but the ONLY text that's meant to be the text for us to learn about the one true God is completely opposite? People say once thing, but the Bible says something else entirely. God kills those literally burn to the wrong people, gives his arbitrary favorites free reign to kill and rape the opposition, makes LITERAL bets with Satan (didn't he kick that guy out? Why would a Supreme being feel the NEED TO WIN A BET WITH THE LITERAL DEVIL?), tells a man to kill his son, KILLS EVERYONE ON EARTH EXCEPT FOR ONE FAMILY, etc..
Spare me the bs, we can all read. And if the Bible is wrong and God is not only misunderstood by real and actually all powerful, he doesn't need any help and is perfectly capable of making his case if he wants to. Until then, it's just a bunch of humans telling stories to other humans bending logic, reason, and even emotion to their whom to justify their blind faith in a being they believe exists and will never, ever see.
And this being supposedly loves us more than our parents? Do you have kids? I have a son. There is literally no scenario where I'd seek to literally torture him even for a little bit, let alone FOREVER.
And if my son rejects me, I have to look inward to understand why. To lash out at him would be petty, which is exactly what God is, because the petty humans that invented the concept of him could only create him through a petty, human lense. Notice how the God we're taught about isn't some monk whose above it all. No. 100% human emotion. Jealousy, pettiness, arrogance, envy. These aren't heavenly concepts that are beyond us, we understand them just fine. God of the Bible is just as much of a petty, unfair azzhole as any Greek God. He's as much of a dick as Zeus was.
Isn't it crazy how people will talk about all this infinite wisdom and love, but the ONLY text that's meant to be the text for us to learn about the one true God is completely opposite? People say once thing, but the Bible says something else entirely. God kills those literally burn to the wrong people, gives his arbitrary favorites free reign to kill and rape the opposition, makes LITERAL bets with Satan (didn't he kick that guy out? Why would a Supreme being feel the NEED TO WIN A BET WITH THE LITERAL DEVIL?), tells a man to kill his son, KILLS EVERYONE ON EARTH EXCEPT FOR ONE FAMILY, etc..
Spare me the bs, we can all read. And if the Bible is wrong and God is not only misunderstood by real and actually all powerful, he doesn't need any help and is perfectly capable of making his case if he wants to. Until then, it's just a bunch of humans telling stories to other humans bending logic, reason, and even emotion to their whom to justify their blind faith in a being they believe exists and will never, ever see.
you either get Spirituality, or you don't. that's all there is to it.
09-28-2022, 07:26 PM
-
#206
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By PutinItInYoGirl⏩
Precisely this. Paul is just making the rounds on all the common debunked creationist talking points. These are nonpoints that have long been addressed, but it gets tiring repetitively addressing them, so I dont waste a lot of time with it. It's best to leave it exactly as you did here- that science will carry on regardless what someone on a bb forum posts about any of this. Scientific facts like evolution arent decided by wordy online debates, or 2-bit mistakes in logic ('a ha! it's just a tautology!'), or anything of the sort. This is a lack of science literacy.I don't get how you seriously believe this. We observe actual genetic changes and adaptation over time in populations. Why is it so hard to accept that eventual accumulation of these results in speciation?
You speak with such an obnoxious authoritative tone while having no training or understanding in the fields you talk about. You misuse basic words and misinterpret everything. Honestly, it's not even worth bothering with you. As NumbersGuy said, nothing you say is going to change anything. Science will carry on because it works, regardless of these objections which have been addressed ad nauseum for decades. There is not going to be any grand revelation that makes us think black holes don't exist, evolution doesn't happen, or that the Earth is flat or 5000 year old or however old you think it is.
You speak with such an obnoxious authoritative tone while having no training or understanding in the fields you talk about. You misuse basic words and misinterpret everything. Honestly, it's not even worth bothering with you. As NumbersGuy said, nothing you say is going to change anything. Science will carry on because it works, regardless of these objections which have been addressed ad nauseum for decades. There is not going to be any grand revelation that makes us think black holes don't exist, evolution doesn't happen, or that the Earth is flat or 5000 year old or however old you think it is.
We will await his published research that shatters the current view of modern biology and the incredibly successful concept of evolution, but until then (and it's not going to happen), it's not worth going on about. Whatever Paul is saying here, it literally doesnt affect anything, everyone in the field continues to understand human's origins, and our students are taught evolution in their biology curriculums. There is a major, obvious asymmetry here: Students in, say, a high school science classroom or university biology classroom in the US dont learn about Pauls ideas of God/intelligent design, they learn the correct fact of evolution. There's actually legal precedent for some of this- intelligent design, for example was exposed for the pseudoscientific nonsense it is in the 2005 Dover, Pa court case.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
09-28-2022, 07:26 PM
-
#207
- BigGameJames
- Registered User
-
- BigGameJames
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2006
- Posts: 873
- Rep Power: 1992
-
-
Originally Posted By blissful88⏩
Yup. Nothing new under the sun. Previous generations had way more wisdom and knowledge.Only an ignorant fool would believe they understand anything better than their creator; let alone mock it
Humanity thinks it's so smart, so all-knowing yet the best we can do for anything is a complete guess(AKA science)
We don't even understand a fraction of a percent of our own planet or life and we never will
In fact I'd be willing to bet we were more advanced in ancient times in terms of knowledge, how else could they build such structures that we can't even do today with all of our equipment
It's the human condition
Humanity thinks it's so smart, so all-knowing yet the best we can do for anything is a complete guess(AKA science)
We don't even understand a fraction of a percent of our own planet or life and we never will
In fact I'd be willing to bet we were more advanced in ancient times in terms of knowledge, how else could they build such structures that we can't even do today with all of our equipment
It's the human condition
Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.
And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light.
09-28-2022, 07:31 PM
-
#208
- Muzzlrpress
- Join Date: Jan 2011
- Location: United States
- Posts: 104,332
- Rep Power: 993953
-
-
Originally Posted By mikebadg3⏩
I'm not talking spirituality, I'm talking literally the Bible. It's the main thing people preach, so I'm using that. If you don't follow the Bible, my post does not apply.your trying too hard to rationalize something that is out of the bounds of our own abilities
you either get Spirituality, or you don't. that's all there is to it.
you either get Spirituality, or you don't. that's all there is to it.
Speaking of the Bible, people always have questions until the answers start to feel really weird and uncomfortable. We're supposed to know good from evil right? It's in the Bible. Eve ate the fruit and screwed us all right? So that means deep down in your heart, there are things in the Bible that disturb you. See, it used to disturb me too when I actually believed it. Turns out it's because in our hearts, we see when something is cruel and evil, but we warp our brains around the difficult things that shake the very core of our beliefs as people. We will rationalize away anything, and when it comes to the Bible, eventually you get to where you can't and have to say something like
"God works in mysterious ways"
"We cave comprehend God"
If that's the case, what's the point of Bible study? What's the point of a preacher? What's the point in even trying to read the Bible if our puny little brains can't understand?
I'll tell you why. We understand, abs if you still hold onto faith it terrifies you because you get that really, really scary word to pop up.
Doubt.
Doubt is health. Questions are healthy. We are human. We question and look for answers, but what's the one subject that's so taboo that when you search for an answer and it's not what you like, it gets written off as "We just don't get it?"
Organized religion
You can't on one hand go "God wants us to live life this"and on the other hand go "God is unknowable". They contradict, which is a pretty common biblical theme.
I'm back, bitches!
09-28-2022, 07:37 PM
-
#209
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
You're making a claim with no evidence. The evidence doesn't support it. Just a theory. Obviously you haven't studied evolutionary biology behind simple mcgraw hill textbooks and children nature documentariesNope, humans, who are apes, descended from apes, andthe evidence vastly supports this. Again, this is correctly taught in any basic biology course. As I had to remind Deathstroke: a few people rambling off wrong hot takes on a forum just doesnt mean anything at the end of the day. Science, the field of biology, and the world marches on, doing their things, regardless of what people untrained in any of this think about it. If you, or your kid goes to a university and enrolls in biology, takes AP biology, etc, they will learn the correct fact of common descent.
I knew facts like being related to common chimps would rustle people in here, it's quite predictable.
I knew facts like being related to common chimps would rustle people in here, it's quite predictable.
And no, I'm not Christian
09-28-2022, 07:41 PM
-
#210
To add to my earlier post, religion is how you live your life, Your values, and moral gauge. You can still be involved in science, however, Christianity helps identify where the line is.
The secular collectivists tend to not have a line, and push it farther and farther; butchering women and children with transition surgeries, gain of function, abortions…it’s always with such confidence they believe they are doing good. And although you can argue “but I don’t believe in those things”, but it doesn’t matter. You support science without moral boundaries.
When you put the two together, you can find a solid foundation of what is good and what is wrong. it will also push science into a good direction, benefiting people in meaningful ways and avoiding the (obvious) terrible outcomes.
In other words, Christianity and science together would help prevent extremists from taking taking over the science. It creates clear boundaries while still progressing.
The secular collectivists tend to not have a line, and push it farther and farther; butchering women and children with transition surgeries, gain of function, abortions…it’s always with such confidence they believe they are doing good. And although you can argue “but I don’t believe in those things”, but it doesn’t matter. You support science without moral boundaries.
When you put the two together, you can find a solid foundation of what is good and what is wrong. it will also push science into a good direction, benefiting people in meaningful ways and avoiding the (obvious) terrible outcomes.
In other words, Christianity and science together would help prevent extremists from taking taking over the science. It creates clear boundaries while still progressing.
One party system; Most Republicans are Democrats, but no Democrats are Republicans.
Hayek and Mises were right; they're all socialists.
"To Call something fair or unfair is a subjective value judgment and not liable to any verification" Ludwig Von Mises
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts