Skip to main content

Hi to all my Forum Friends,

In the discussion "Dear Christian" begun by our atheist Friend, Robust -- Rram has given us a tremendous resource which we ALL should bookmark for future reference and use.

The web site is Apologetics Press and this particular page deals with the Alleged Bible Discrepancies which our atheist Friends are so quick to trot out.  When you open this web page, you can choose to look at Old Testament or New Testament.  Then, you can choose a particular book within the Old or New Testament.  

This will then offer you a rather complete list of the alleged discrepancies and gives a very good explanation; an explanation that even an atheist, if he/she will be honest, cannot dispute.   Of course, we know they all will argue -- for that is the only defense they have for their atheist Religion of Nothing.   

So, like the guy standing in the middle of the interstate asking, "What truck?" as the eighteen wheeler barrels toward him -- our atheist Friends will stick their heads deeper into the sands of atheism, all the while screaming, "God is not real!  God is not real!"    So be it.

Take a look for yourself.  Then, do as I did -- and bookmark it.  You will find it useful the next time an atheist or other non-believing Friend declares the Bible to be full of discrepancies.   


http://www.apologeticspress.or...edDiscrepancies.aspx     

 

Rram, thank you for making us aware of this great apologetic resource.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Hi Jimi,

 

You remind me very much of the little kid who sits in class at elementary school, throwing spit balls in an attempt to get attention.  Let me offer a suggestion.  Try actually entering into an a discussion with an intelligent thought, comment, or question -- and, just possibly, others will begin to view you as an adult and begin to respond.  But, your barbs and pithy comments only look to us like childish spit balls.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Having met Kyle on the sidewalk outside Rosies, in Downtown Florence, on First Friday's I found him to be very intelligent and determined.  It matters not what Church he is affiliated with for his ability to convey the Christian standpoint is very detailed and accurate.  As for the debate with the atheist I shall reserve opinion for later.  I did watch the last debate on God, at the University, and that debate, in my opinion, was not handled well by the Christian representative who allowed himself to get trapped into the trap of trying to atone for Old Testament acts of God.  He spent more time trying to defend actions of God as if God needed any defense or trying to define God in Physical terms which is not possible. 

 

God, Himself, knew well that man seeks Physical proof and Physical evidence and refelected His (God's) wisdom when He directed Moses to instruct them that "I AM" sent him.   "I AM" is as defined a definition of God as could be expected.  There is no sex, no nationality, no color assigned and no Human Name given but rather an acknowledgement of existence.

 

Kyle should do well and is, in my mind, much more capable of catching the traps that are laid to fall into.  Kyle should be able to draw the distinction between Spiritual Realm and Physical Realm and their capabilities or lack of them.  If anyone is capable of debating, for Christians, it is Kyle so I look forward to the next debate.  Either way I doubt it will change minds.  Pre-bias on both sides will already confirm in people's minds who wins or prevails and the actual outcome will most likely not change that preconceived perception.  As for capability though Kyle should have the atheist on his A-Game and know enough not to get trapped therefore present our strongest case for God.

 

In my mind, with respect to representing God a win is if the element of doubt could be injected.  By this I mean if Kyle could produce a "reasonable case for doubt" that God exist.  I do not feel any atheist will be convinced by Kyle or any other Christian that God exist for I believe that only God can provide that convincing evidence through ministry/conviction of God's Holy Spirit.  Kyle however is as capable as any Christian I know to represent the Christian position and eliminate the feeling of certainty that God doesn't exist.  If he can accomplish that then he will have prevailed.  

Like I said, the religious majority is unaware that such language against God even exists as occurs in these closed door meetings by humanists and atheistic s I hope that this publicity will forge a resolve by the responsible part of society that these less-than-human ideas are just that and are counter to mans stewardship of this God given planet and it’s people.

 

Pup my friend its tragic that all victims such as yourself are trapped in the atheistic insanities.

I think it's more that they are jilted because God doesn't come down from Heaven and appear in front of their very eyes.  They further are enraged that these simpleton Christians might actually have some contact and something from God that they don't have and cannot realize. 


Think about it Ram,   from a psychological standpoint and view anyone that is effected by some form of jealousy usually manifest that emotion, eventually, in anger or some form of anger such as verbal or potentially, eventually physical as for relationships.  On here though we see manifestations of anger in the form of insults since really there is no other way to voice anger and aggression.  From Scripture we understand also that anger is a result of being led by the fleshly nature rather than being led by the Holy Spirit of Christ.. 


This is why they are so opposed to Scripture.  Not because we consider it the Word of God but because it IS the Word of God and the very words of scripture convicts them of their actions.  If it was truly a case of non-belief then they would never mention it twice but ignore it.  Because though it strikes a note, a chord, within their inner spirit/mind they abhor it, they find it offensive for it effects them because it cuts to the bone.  No there are reasons for the insults and they are the same now as they were in Christ day.  The exact same motivation creates the inner aggression which is fed and amplified by anger.  So enjoy the insults for Christ and the Disciples suffered the same in Christ Name. 

Originally Posted by gbrk:

  On here though we see manifestations of anger in the form of insults since really there is no other way to voice anger and aggression.  

 

 

GB, don't confuse our "anger" with simply calling BS on your goofy claims such as the stupid Shroud thing you keep bringing up. I am angry at no one . . .  OK, perhaps one but it isn't you.   If you dont' like BS being called upon you, then stop spewing BS.

Pup says:

"If god was real, he wouldn't need to be debated.

There'd be no doubt."

 

That doesn't hold up to scrutiny, Pup. There have been millions of things that were real, that have been debated. Just look at the people who study physics. Do you think black holes weren't debated? How about quantum black holes? One actually DOES exist, and one never did, although for a while there some (Stephen Hawking was the first) BELIEVED they did. And look at medicine! There has been a debate just about eating eggs that has raged back and forth for years. People keep collecting conflicting evidence for years.

Originally Posted by gbrk:

I think it's more that they are jilted because God doesn't come down from Heaven and appear in front of their very eyes.  They further are enraged that these simpleton Christians might actually have some contact and something from God that they don't have and cannot realize. 

Is this the kind of "anger" you are talkign about, GB?  Shall you do what the Lord commands you and kill us all?

 

"Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods.  In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully.  If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock.  Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it.  Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God.  That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt.  Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction.  Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you.  He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors.  "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him."  (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)" 

Numbers 31:17
 
 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man
 
Numbers 31:18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

Deuteronomy 7:2 and when the LORD your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.

Deuteronomy 20:16 However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes.

Judges 21:10 So the assembly sent twelve thousand fighting men with instructions to go to Jabesh Gilead and put to the sword those living there, including the women and children.

Judges 21:11 "This is what you are to do," they said. "Kill every male and every woman who is not a virgin."
 
 
 
Ahhhhh, ain't love grand!

UNO/Jennifer why would I or any other Christian do such?  See that's where being able to understand the Bible and comprehend it rather than just pulling out words to use for your own benefit or to make your own point is wrong. 


Do you not know who that was written to and for what reason?  It was written to Israel as directions to God's people for governing themselves in that specific time period for that specific people.  ARE you trying to imply that because that appears in the Scripture that it applies to today?  I know you both are more intelligent than that. 


Look at our own nation and some of the crazy laws that were valid in their time and today make no sense at all.  We don't ride around on horses any more and there are other things that were relevant in their time but not valid today.  The same with God's commands and words.  Some were specific directives for Israel and necessary to Govern their nation and people according to what God demanded.  If they violated the directions then those punishments were to be administered. 


Today we live under the period of Grace where Salvation is open to the Gentiles as well as the Jews and today we are all under a Judgment upon sin but that actual Judgment comes later, after our death, but we are given a way to escape that judgment for one has paid our penalty for our sins and sin nature.  Jesus Christ and those who put their trust in Him to have paid the price for their sins.  Old Testament laws regarding the governing of the nation of Israel do not apply to Christians and people today so no people are killed for that today but that doesn't mean we, as humans, do not need to concern ourselves with a future judgment upon our acts and words and deeds as all Christians and non-Christians will face God in the future whether or not we accept to believe in Him today.

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by gbrk:

  On here though we see manifestations of anger in the form of insults since really there is no other way to voice anger and aggression.  

 

 

GB, don't confuse our "anger" with simply calling BS on your goofy claims such as the stupid Shroud thing you keep bringing up. I am angry at no one . . .  OK, perhaps one but it isn't you.   If you dont' like BS being called upon you, then stop spewing BS.

Uno, Disagree with what we say, argue that you don't believe in God or that you don't Believe in the Bible but how is calling BS incorporate personal remarks of a demeaning nature against the person posting?   What would cause personal insults if not some inward emotion about either the specific individual being insulted or due to the persons belief?   How is calling someone names calling BS against what they believe?   If you call BS on something that usually means you provide some convincing argument to the contrary.  Sorry but I don't see that happen here so that's why I said it must spring from some inner anger or resentment regarding either Church, Christians in general, or some other thing related to Christians or Christianity.  There seems to be no argument about why atheism is the all end all and how what is said is wrong?  Usually most things discussed are opinions or personal beliefs that can neither be proven or disproven.  Just because it isn't right or real for one doesn't mean it is not for the other.  


Calling BS is no more than an arrogant way of saying I'm Right and don't care about debate you accept that I'm right and it doesn't work that way.  How, otherwise, would you explain it then?

UNO/Jennifer why would I or any other Christian do such?  See that's where being able to understand the Bible and comprehend it rather than just pulling out words to use for your own benefit or to make your own point is wrong

 

 Where did I say you would do it? Come on now, show me proof or be discredited. Pulling out words? Goodness, that's a bit more than just words.

Originally Posted by gbrk:


Do you not know who that was written to and for what reason?  It was written to Israel as directions to God's people for governing themselves in that specific time period for that specific people.  ARE you trying to imply that because that appears in the Scripture that it applies to today?  I know you both are more intelligent than that. 



So EXACTLY what tools of reason do you use to determine what verses to abide by and which to ignore?  You use plenty in the Old Testament as justification for your intolerance such as anti-homosecuality, the 10 Commandments, eye-for-eye and so forth.

Genesis was written for people who knew nothing about cosmology, geology, astrophysics and quantum physics.  Yes you insist that it is the literal, inerrant word of God-a-mighty and outright refuse to even ponder anything that contradicts.  So why don't us your your same "logic" to refute Deuteronomy as you do for Genesis?

Originally Posted by Jennifer:

Funny how gb thinks the atheist's disagreement with religion is anger, but disagreement with atheism from christians is some sort of caring.

I haven't disagreed with atheism. Here is what I believe about atheism.  I said people believe as they do because they usually have a basis for what they believe.  Also I said that someone that does not know God, does not experience God's Holy Spirit has no first hand knowledge of God so would naturally believe He doesn't exist.  I also said that belief though does not mean God does not exist.

 

If anything could be called a disagreement with atheism it would be how many atheist interact with Christians or people of faith.  Many times that interaction is doing exactly to Christians what they claim Christians do unto them.  Words like arrogant, fundamental, hypocrisy,  judgmental etc cut both ways and can apply to atheist as much as Christians.  Everyone is human so subject to exactly the same emotions.

 

The use of the word anger was a guess, hypothetical guess, as to what would or could possibly be happening within a persons mind/emotions that would cause them to use personal insults against people they don't even know, fellow forum members, just because of their personal belief.  It's not respecting an individuals right to believe as they wish.  I've seen results of someone being angry before and their actions are quite similar.  They call names they demean the other person attacking the person rather than the argument.  I'm not the only one that sees it there are plenty of others.  Often, and it should be, but often terse and harsh remarks are returned to avenge being personally attacked for ones choice of belief.

 

I reached my limit when there was no respect given to a simple and reasonable request to allow some of us to discuss a particular scripture among ourselves.  There wasn't any attempt to restrict the forum but ask that IF you join in that you don't do so by attacking or demeaning us for our belief or because we believe the Bible is God's Word but NO that respect would not even be extended (by some) even when requested.  So if it's going to be so I resolved to call attention to it and as much attention to it as is needed to reveal it for what it is.  It may not be anger toward an individual but anger toward religion or Christianity, or the Bible or God in general.  Anger may not apply to all but something is causing the harsh words that are used when there is no reason to do so.  Everyone wants respect and when they don't get it then what is the reason for it?  If not anger then what?

Originally Posted by Jennifer:

UNO/Jennifer why would I or any other Christian do such?  See that's where being able to understand the Bible and comprehend it rather than just pulling out words to use for your own benefit or to make your own point is wrong

 

 Where did I say you would do it? Come on now, show me proof or be discredited. Pulling out words? Goodness, that's a bit more than just words.

Unlike you Jennifer I answer those accusations and show PROOF or EVIDENCE when requested.   Reference UNO's question, in his post, above.

 

Is this the kind of "anger" you are talkign about, GB?  Shall you do what the Lord commands you and kill us all?

 

That is a question and what does he say at the end ... "Shall you do what the Lord commands you and kill us all?"  Yes Jennifer I was ask that question so there you go and the reason I posted what I did.  I also addressed that to UNO and not only you so don't you go taking offense because it was to him also and above you see the sentence why.  It was addressed to both of you because both of you threw in scripture reference to try and make a point that the scripture never was meant to make. 


Now why don' you Woman up and do the SAME as I did and produce your evidence that I ever wanted to make the Religion Forum an exclusive Christian forum?  You did make that statement and are steaming from my calling you on it so you wanted me to "show me proof or be discredited".

 

So Jennifer back at you .. show me your proof (of your statement about me under the other Subject) or remain discredited!  Do it here or do it there but (like Nike) Just do it!

Originally Posted by Jennifer:

We're finally getting close to the admission that nothing in the bible means what it says, and that it is just a bunch of stories made up by superstitious bloodthirsty old men.

Those are YOUR words and what you want to see.  There is no such admission, from me, of what you want to construe about the Bible.   My statement, Regarding the Bible is that it is and remains the Word of God to humankind.  It can be read and understood from an intellectual standpoint or appreciated for the poetry and historical significance but as for Spiritual Meaning that will only and can only come to those whom the Lord God reveals it to by His Holy Spirit.  So while there are some things that can be understood in the Bible there are many others that God teaches to those who are His.

You reached your limit? Well la de da. I didn't post on that thread now did I? My limit came when you kept asking the same question over and over about why we come to this forum, even though we had answered it. Then you proceed to get snarky and pretend you don't know what I mean when I told you how the forum had been previously titled. You kept posting and posting about how YOU hadn't seen it titled that way. So what if YOU didn't see it, it was what it was. Then you start to demand "proof".  If you want proof you can wade through all the old threads and posts, I'm certainly not going to do it for you.  You think you're playing some clever game but all you're doing is making yourself look very silly and immature. What you claim is our "hatred" is a loss of patience with you because you insist on acting, and it is an act I hope, naive (to put it politely).

GB, I wouldn't waste any more time on this if I were you. Jennifer is mad at you because she says you won't accept her answer to your question. Yet when atheists ask US a question and we answer it, they NEVER accept the answer. Some of the atheists on this board are masters of the double standard. Arguing with them is a total waste of time, because they don't want answers, they just want an excuse to keep throwing insults.

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by gbrk:

  On here though we see manifestations of anger in the form of insults since really there is no other way to voice anger and aggression.  

 

 

GB, don't confuse our "anger" with simply calling BS on your goofy claims such as the stupid Shroud thing you keep bringing up. I am angry at no one . . .  OK, perhaps one but it isn't you.   If you dont' like BS being called upon you, then stop spewing BS.


=============

hey don't be mad at me unoi. You are the one who wants to be the maverick [unbranded range animal: Wiki] here in the Bible Belt and don't know your place.

 

You act like you're a member of the Rotary Club.

Originally Posted by O No!:

And how many times, Jennifer, have atheists asked about conflicting verses in the Bible? Each time we answered you, and each time you don't accept out answers. Face it, you're not here to learn, you're here to "take it out on someone". Why don't you go find a puppy to kick?


*************************************************************************************************************

 

You're the one that seems to have something that you need to "take out" on someone. Go read our responses to gb. We answered him/her but he/she kept posting over and over again about it. So once again let me state, the "anger" or "taking it out" on someone you claim I have is simply a loss of patience with people that don't want to accept an answer. You are the same way, I've read some of your posts to people, but I guess since you're all godly and stuff you feel you are allowed to state your opinions but others aren't. GB wouldn't accept my or AR's answers so it's clear that he/she had no real interest in the answer and was just using it to start a "conflict" so he/she could crawl up on the cross again. As far as contradictions in the bible, I ask the other day about one and no one would take it on.

Originally Posted by Jennifer:
Originally Posted by O No!:

And how many times, Jennifer, have atheists asked about conflicting verses in the Bible? Each time we answered you, and each time you don't accept out answers. Face it, you're not here to learn, you're here to "take it out on someone". Why don't you go find a puppy to kick?


*************************************************************************************************************

 

You're the one that seems to have something that you need to "take out" on someone. Go read our responses to gb. We answered him/her but he/she kept posting over and over again about it. So once again let me state, the "anger" or "taking it out" on someone you claim I have is simply a loss of patience with people that don't want to accept an answer. You are the same way, I've read some of your posts to people, but I guess since you're all godly and stuff you feel you are allowed to state your opinions but others aren't. GB wouldn't accept my or AR's answers so it's clear that he/she had no real interest in the answer and was just using it to start a "conflict" so he/she could crawl up on the cross again. As far as contradictions in the bible, I ask the other day about one and no one would take it on.

 

That is what this whole thread is about - the so-called contradictions in the Bible. And yet you didn't even read from the link Bill provided, did you? You refuse to read anything Bill or GB posts if you thin the posts are too long, so how can you even participate in the conversation if you refuse to hear what others are saying?

 

I know - because you aren't HERE for conversation, you just can't find a puppy!

 

They are reading them Jennifer.  I posted your response that appeared directly below that question and you replied with a series of WHY questions which were no real answer.  Others may have responded and I addressed post to them but I didn't ask but under ONE SUBJECT.  Your pizzed because maybe sometime in the past someone else ask you and you do not want to be ask/challenged again. 


YES there is a double standard and you atheist do exactly the things you accuse us Christians of but somehow you deserve a pass.  You have made statements implying that I want to restrict the Religion forum only to Christians yet that never was done.  All of a sudden it seems that I should not ask (ASK) the Times Daily to clarify what the Religion forum is for.  I did so because you said it stated before Religion and other practices and beliefs or something like that.  IF I didn't believe you why would I have ask TD to clarify it.  I took your word for it but ONLY ask for proof after I kept asking you to show proof where I wanted to make the Religion forum a Christian only forum and you kept making accusations as If it was true without proof.  I then decided if I can't trust you to represent me correctly then it might be possible you saw what you wanted to see.


Listen again, for all, I said that I would welcome anyone (respectful) to the Religion forum that was here to contribute and participate without having to try and be disruptive.  Most forum members do not welcome or want anyone who is here just for the purpose of being destructive and demeaning toward other forum members who happen to believe differently than they or who happen to be here because they believe in a religion or Christianity.  You and others have turned that around to say I wanted a Christian only Forum. 


What I DID request was consideration from all atheist on here to allow some of the Christians or people that accept the Bible as real, to be able to discuss some scripture without all the heckling from atheist about how it isn't false or how we are dumb to believe in it.  No you did not violate that but enough atheist did that it proves and shows that there is NO way that any Christian will get enough respect to be able to discuss anything of importance to them.  Y'all are not interested in debate or discussion you are interested in conquering and in depriving Christians of any chance to discuss anything related to Christ or God.  You say you are here to call BS on what we say. WHY?  It is YOUR (as in atheist) opinion and not a certainty.  It is your opinion that cannot be proved or disproven so calling BS on it is atheist arrogance saying I don't care about what you believe I don't like it therefore I'm not going to let you discuss it without chiming in. 


The intent from your post reveal anything but considerate or respectful debate or discussion and when revealed boy does it get a reaction.  Maybe because it struck a nerve?.

No I don't read all their long rambling posts.  Bill's posting this thread is nothing but a continuation of the silly crap ramn was posting, and as I told ramn I am familiar with butts and the Apologetics Press . As far as the "puppies" go, I have three of them right here. Not gonna kick them though, and no one had better even think of doing it to them either.

Originally Posted by O No!:

GB, I wouldn't waste any more time on this if I were you. Jennifer is mad at you because she says you won't accept her answer to your question. Yet when atheists ask US a question and we answer it, they NEVER accept the answer. Some of the atheists on this board are masters of the double standard. Arguing with them is a total waste of time, because they don't want answers, they just want an excuse to keep throwing insults.

I still don't know if I got Jennifer's answer as to why atheist would want to post on a forum dedicated to Religion.  I did get a bunch of "Why" questions as a response and I later got accused of wanting to restrict this forum only to Christians so I did needle ( repeat over and over asking the same thing ) but that wasn't the initial question as to why atheist would want to post in a forum dedicated to Religion.  Why I kept asking the same thing .. as in Prove it was that I never said it so I defended myself by demanding proof from her so yeah I did ask the same thing over and over and over and still don't think I got an reply to that either but I could be wrong because I haven't looked.  Maybe they think I didn't accept their answer or what they felt was their answer because I made the accusation that I believed that some atheist are in the forum posting for nefarious or destructive reasons.  I based that mostly on the content of some of their post and the continual assaults in each and every topic.

 

Jennifer's closest answer to the question was because they could post here because it said (in the old forum format) that it was for Religion and other beliefs and practices and she seems upset because I didn't see it.  She said that because of that "other practices" I suppose that would give atheist the right and privilege to jump in and disrupt any of our attempts at establishing a conversation.  Jennifer did not say it in that way some will take it that way as justifying their post. 

 

If the forum did say for other beliefs and practices, and I saw it, I most likely would have never entered to post there as I don't go into forums that are dedicated to atheist.  I, unlike some, don't care to go into a forum and post when I don't agree with it or what it's targeted for.  IF the times daily changes this forum from Religion to Philosophy or something like that I doubt I will post near as much because ti will be apparent that it is wasting time and that no Christian will ever get a chance to actually discuss anything for everything, every subject would be nothing but arguments and insults.  If they say it's for Religion and Religions then I'll stay and the atheist can justify in their own minds and their fellow forum members why they would choose to post in a forum that was targeted for something they don't believe in or accept. 

quote:  Originally Posted by Jennifer:

High five crusty. If the contradictions in the bible could be explained, which they can't, you'd think by now someone could have done it. 


Hi Jennifer,

 

If you have the honesty to visit the web site: 


http://www.apologeticspress.or...edDiscrepancies.aspx

 

You will find a valid explanation of many, many of your so called discrepancies.  However, maybe you prefer to just keep yelling "God is not real!  God is not real!" -- while at the same time you will not even look to see if He is truly real.   In other words, you hide your head deeply in the sands of atheism and refuse to even look for Truth.

 

Regarding your other post where you supposedly have found, on some atheist web site, Scripture verses which prove that God is evil -- instead of trying to respond to all of your rants -- let me offer you a challenge.  If you will pick a verse or passage, tell me what you believe it is saying -- I will give you my interpretation of what I believe it means.  

 

That sounds fair to me.  How about you?  Or will you just burrow your head deeper in your sands of atheism, declaring, "I don't have time to bother with your silly suggestion!" -- which in reality means, "I am afraid you will show me to be wrong."    

 

Jennifer, I look forward to dialoguing with you on any verse or passage you choose.  And, then, you can choose another and we will do the same for it.  Are you ready to seek the Truth?

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by gbrk:


Do you not know who that was written to and for what reason?  It was written to Israel as directions to God's people for governing themselves in that specific time period for that specific people.  ARE you trying to imply that because that appears in the Scripture that it applies to today?  I know you both are more intelligent than that. 



So EXACTLY what tools of reason do you use to determine what verses to abide by and which to ignore?  You use plenty in the Old Testament as justification for your intolerance such as anti-homosecuality, the 10 Commandments, eye-for-eye and so forth.

Genesis was written for people who knew nothing about cosmology, geology, astrophysics and quantum physics.  Yes you insist that it is the literal, inerrant word of God-a-mighty and outright refuse to even ponder anything that contradicts.  So why don't us your your same "logic" to refute Deuteronomy as you do for Genesis?

There is only ONE tool which Christians use to receive and abide by God's specific directions and by which we glean spiritual meaning from scripture and that took, if you wish to call it that, is God's Holy Spirit that is given freely to each and every true Christian believer and Saint of God.  Jesus promised that Holy Spirit in John 14 and God baptized each true believer at the moment of their true conversion and salvation through Christ Jesus.  It's being born again (spiritually) not bodily.  Spiritually and not physically, it's a profound substantial change of heart, mind, and direction of life such that people change overnight in a seconds time, the blink of an eye.  Such a change that it is no less than miraculous and indis****bly (to the person/believer) of and by God.  As for what to abide by or what is relevant to today and the past that comes through reading the book.  Some is evident from the reading for it says who it's being written to.  If it is not written to us then it isn't for us.  If it is written to Israel then it's to Jews not to Gentiles.  There are many things that are revealed, by God, through His Holy Spirit also.

Originally Posted by Jennifer:

You reached your limit? Well la de da. I didn't post on that thread now did I? My limit came when you kept asking the same question over and over about why we come to this forum, even though we had answered it. Then you proceed to get snarky and pretend you don't know what I mean when I told you how the forum had been previously titled. You kept posting and posting about how YOU hadn't seen it titled that way. So what if YOU didn't see it, it was what it was. Then you start to demand "proof".  If you want proof you can wade through all the old threads and posts, I'm certainly not going to do it for you.  You think you're playing some clever game but all you're doing is making yourself look very silly and immature. What you claim is our "hatred" is a loss of patience with you because you insist on acting, and it is an act I hope, naive (to put it politely).

What I meant by reached my limit was that I was not going to attempt to be political any longer but rather speak up and confront disrespectful actions of some atheist.  i was going to attempt to do all I could to reveal those actions as disrespectful and for what they were.  That is what I meant by reaching my limit.  As another poster said about turning the other cheek, so to say, I decided that I would no longer allow disrespect to go unaddressed.  Some of the atheist say they call BS on our statements ( which is really opinions so their opinions somehow are better than another members).  I will no longer allow these unprovoked personal attacks against Christians to go unaddressed. 

 

If the reason is to cause disruption and disrespect then it should be recognized for what it is.

Originally Posted by Bill Gray:

Long time lurker.  Time to jump in.  Hopefully on the side of civil, intelligent debate....with both eyes open.

Take a look for yourself.  Then, do as I did -- and bookmark it.  You will find it useful the next time an atheist or other non-believing Friend declares the Bible to be full of discrepancies. 

This resource will only be useful (at least parts of it) if you equate non-believing with non-Church of Christ, or any other flavor that believes in the necessity of Baptism for salvation.


http://www.apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=806

 

This is IMHO one of the more significant parts of the problem.  One man's "There it is in black and white" is another man's "You're taking it out of context/reading it wrong"

 

Of course the bible is full of discrepancies.  To state otherwise would be to ignore the fact that ]there are hundreds, if not thousands of different interpretations [read: Denominations] some more inclusive/exclusive than others.





 

Of course it is gbrk. I read too many atheistic forums to not know their battle plan is to be nasty to Christians. They are nuts. They all have personal vendettas against some sin in the Bible of some special misery they blame on the democratic way things are done.

Unoi for instance rails against not being able to buy alcohol from likker stores on Sunday.

It’s like being water boarded to him; the thought he can’t get it 24 hrs aday.

I’m sure he buys extra but his thought process is: my god what if I drink my Sunday supply all up on Saturday. That thought is un-nerving to imbibers.

Others are the occasion that sexual opportunities might arise counter to societal norms when gauged against religion. Beastism, fornication adultery etc. I could drag this mentality out forever. You get the point.

Originally Posted by O No!:

 Yet when atheists ask US a question and we answer it, they NEVER accept the answer. 

 

You all generally completly ignore out pointed questions and, yes, when you do answer, the answer makes no sense.  Case in point, GB stated that the murderous God of Deuteronomy was maing rules for the people who lived at the time and those rules no longer applied.  That is a BS answer, of course, but to get him (and you?) to reaslise that I asked: 

 

"So EXACTLY what tools of reason do you use to determine what verses to abide by and which 

(no longer apply)   Genesis was written for people who knew nothing about cosmology, geology, astrophysics and quantum physics.  Yes you insist that it is the literal, inerrant word of God-a-mighty and outright refuse to even ponder anything that contradicts.  So why don't us your your same "logic" to refute Deuteronomy as you do for Genesis? "

GB was unsurprisingly mute on this question as I knew he would be,  How about you? 

As for Ram's post those are his comments why should you expect I would love them?  If though you wish my comment on his post it's this. WE agree that the motive of some/many atheist posting under the topic of Religion is due to some personal combat or agenda against Christianity or any Religion and if those who practice it or believe in it get in the way then so be it. 


As for his assertion that "they are nuts" and the other statements you will note that he says he made the observation and statement from his reading from within atheist forums.  Since I don't go into them or care to I can't say what he says is incorrect because I do not have any basis to say it's false or that they are true.  I don't go in there and it is his  personal opinion.  I say what I believe it works that way.  He doesn't tell me what to say and I don't tell him.


As for his statement about Uno again I don't know Uno except from interaction on the forum.  I would not say that from what I know of uno, based on from here, and those were his (Ram's) words not mine so I will not comment on uno and what Ram said one way or the other as that is between them. 


As for the premise that some atheist have aggression against Christians or Christianity because of some stance on sin or some words they have heard from a Christian or read in the Bible I do believe that is possible.  There must be some reason for the apparent hostility that often comes out in the words that are posted.  Whether it be Homosexuality, Alcohol, Sex, Pride, whatever no one likes to be judged by another person so it's possible that someone's anger or aggression is triggered because of another Christian that had nothing to do with the original cause.  AS I said in another post I do believe there is some reason behind all the insults and feelings about Christians and Churches or other Religions. 


So now that I have commented on it why would you even wonder what I would think about a post from Ram?

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by O No!:

 Yet when atheists ask US a question and we answer it, they NEVER accept the answer. 

 

You all generally completly ignore out pointed questions and, yes, when you do answer, the answer makes no sense.  Case in point, GB stated that the murderous God of Deuteronomy was maing rules for the people who lived at the time and those rules no longer applied.  That is a BS answer, of course, but to get him (and you?) to reaslise that I asked: 

 

"So EXACTLY what tools of reason do you use to determine what verses to abide by and which 

(no longer apply)   Genesis was written for people who knew nothing about cosmology, geology, astrophysics and quantum physics.  Yes you insist that it is the literal, inerrant word of God-a-mighty and outright refuse to even ponder anything that contradicts.  So why don't us your your same "logic" to refute Deuteronomy as you do for Genesis? "

GB was unsurprisingly mute on this question as I knew he would be,  How about you? 

Just in case you missed it I will repeat what I replied with at 1:54PM today.  Wow y'all are so expecting that we have to reply within a set period of time or you assume we either don't want to answer or will not answer.   Here is what I posted to you BEFORE you made your statement that I didn't respond:

 

There is only ONE tool which Christians use to receive and abide by God's specific directions and by which we glean spiritual meaning from scripture and that took, if you wish to call it that, is God's Holy Spirit that is given freely to each and every true Christian believer and Saint of God.  Jesus promised that Holy Spirit in John 14 and God baptized each true believer at the moment of their true conversion and salvation through Christ Jesus.  It's being born again (spiritually) not bodily.  Spiritually and not physically, it's a profound substantial change of heart, mind, and direction of life such that people change overnight in a seconds time, the blink of an eye.  Such a change that it is no less than miraculous and indis****bly (to the person/believer) of and by God.  As for what to abide by or what is relevant to today and the past that comes through reading the book.  Some is evident from the reading for it says who it's being written to.  If it is not written to us then it isn't for us.  If it is written to Israel then it's to Jews not to Gentiles.  There are many things that are revealed, by God, through His Holy Spirit also.

 

See uno I give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't see it or read it.  I know you wouldn't say something so crazy so I repeated it.  You ask a question and I answered ...  unsurprisingly ummm .. no reply expected.  Again either read above or go to my post back to you responding at 1:54 PM earlier. 

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by O No!:

 Yet when atheists ask US a question and we answer it, they NEVER accept the answer. 

 

You all generally completly ignore out pointed questions and, yes, when you do answer, the answer makes no sense.  Case in point, GB stated that the murderous God of Deuteronomy was maing rules for the people who lived at the time and those rules no longer applied.  That is a BS answer, of course, but to get him (and you?) to reaslise that I asked: 

 

"So EXACTLY what tools of reason do you use to determine what verses to abide by and which 

(no longer apply)   Genesis was written for people who knew nothing about cosmology, geology, astrophysics and quantum physics.  Yes you insist that it is the literal, inerrant word of God-a-mighty and outright refuse to even ponder anything that contradicts.  So why don't us your your same "logic" to refute Deuteronomy as you do for Genesis? "

GB was unsurprisingly mute on this question as I knew he would be,  How about you? 


Because Genisis is telling us what HAPPENED. Deuteronomy is telling the JEWS what to DO. I have said over and over and over again, you can't take the Bible out of context and expect it to make sense, any more than you can any other book. You refuse to accept that answer and keep asking the same old questions, trying to "trap" Christians. I have told you over and over and over again that unless one has the Holy Spirit residing within, one will not be able to resolve any questions one might have about spiritual things in general, but you won't accept that anser either.  Face it, you don't WANT honest answers, you want to disrupt, insult, and ridicule Christians. That is ALL. And the Bible warns us that there will be people whose main goal is doing just that. So we are prepared for you.

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:

And another reason we are mad:

Not ALL Christians, not me, and most if not all on this forum believed that.  I haven't said that uno was going ....... or that you would suffer such and such a punishment.   I have said that I fully believe that everyone (Christian and non) will be judged by God at a future date and time after our death and based upon our acts, actions, and either acceptance or rejection of Jesus Christ as our advocate against sin, as our Savior.  Is that threatening to you?     You understand hypothetical I'm sure so if someone knows something about a bridge being out is it a threat to warn people not to drive over the bridge?  No one is forcing their opinion or belief on you.  So why take your anger at whatever or whoever on US who are trying to post on the forum to other Christians.  You have a problem with someone specific then identify who and why and hash it out but don't lump us all into the same group.  That is not reasonable, just, or right.   I don't do it to you and I request the same.  I've told you I didn't appreciate your post into the subject I created to discuss scripture which if your first response to my confrontation to you about it had stood it would have been sufficient but you kept on so I had a problem with you disrupting the subject I was trying to be serious about starting. 

 

As for Islam or their radical sect I too wish that they were reasonable but I don't hold it against all Muslims.  Many or most are not like that and I would welcome any Muslim here as well to discuss/debate topics of religion or common interest  If though they come in being disrespectful of other participants and what they believe then I would object to that as well. 

Originally Posted by O No!:
 


Because Genisis is telling us what HAPPENED. Deuteronomy is telling the JEWS what to DO.

 

 

We don't accept your answer becasue THEY MAKE NO SENSE. 

 

I see.  So you are now a Creationist?  And should the Jews continue to do as they were told by the Lord?  The laws against homosexuality, adultery, murder and stealing should or should not stay and exactly what logic do you use in determining what to obey or not?

 

Then you say, " I have told you over and over and over again that unless one has the Holy Spirit residing within" and once again, you've got some splainin to do,  You evidently must have "spiritual discernment" to understand the bible (which I THOUGHT I used to have but according to you I did not).  So exactly how does one go about getting this discernment without having discernment ?  As a former militant atheist yourself, i'm sure you can tell us a logical way to gain discernment when you think it is all BS,  I await. 


Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:

Sounds like somebody believes that the "Holy Spirit" actually speaks to them. Get a rubber room ready for this lunatic!

Jimi there are times when you seem to speak about something you don't have the slightest idea about.  This is definitely one of them.  There are many interpretations about blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and I would caution about any statements concerning the Holy Spirit but do as you feel free to it's your choice.

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by O No!:
 


Because Genisis is telling us what HAPPENED. Deuteronomy is telling the JEWS what to DO.

 

 

We don't accept your answer becasue THEY MAKE NO SENSE. 

 

I see.  So you are now a Creationist?  And should the Jews continue to do as they were told by the Lord?  The laws against homosexuality, adultery, murder and stealing should or should not stay and exactly what logic do you use in determining what to obey or not?

 

Then you say, " I have told you over and over and over again that unless one has the Holy Spirit residing within" and once again, you've got some splainin to do,  You evidently must have "spiritual discernment" to understand the bible (which I THOUGHT I used to have but according to you I did not).  So exactly how does one go about getting this discernment without having discernment ?  As a former militant atheist yourself, i'm sure you can tell us a logical way to gain discernment when you think it is all BS,  I await. 



What the Jews do is between them and God. None of my business. When Christ died for our sins, all of the rules changed. While the Old Testament has instructions for the Jews, and it has history and wisdom for all, the only "rules" we have to abide by now are the ones Jesus gave us.

 

Your last paragraph is a bit difficult to decipher. What exactly are you saying *I* think is all BS?

 

But if you are asking how to get the Holy Spirit to come into your heart so you will have guidance in SPIRITUAL MATTERS, all you have to do is ask sincerely. And please note, I NEVER said one needs the Holy Spirit to understand what the Bible says. I said one needs the Holy Spirit for guidance in spiritual matters. There is a difference you know.

 

As for our answers not making any sense to you, well, perhaps if you ask for guidance from the Holy Spirit, you will understand.

 

But just who do *I* ask for guidance to understand your reasons for constantly insulting people of faith? Your flying spaghetti monster?

 

Nah, I'll ask the Holy Spirit. And I've already gotten the answer. (And no, I won't share that answer here - you wouldn't like it.)

 

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by O No!:
 


Because Genisis is telling us what HAPPENED. Deuteronomy is telling the JEWS what to DO.

 

 

We don't accept your answer becasue THEY MAKE NO SENSE. 

 

I see.  So you are now a Creationist?  And should the Jews continue to do as they were told by the Lord?  The laws against homosexuality, adultery, murder and stealing should or should not stay and exactly what logic do you use in determining what to obey or not?

 

Then you say, " I have told you over and over and over again that unless one has the Holy Spirit residing within" and once again, you've got some splainin to do,  You evidently must have "spiritual discernment" to understand the bible (which I THOUGHT I used to have but according to you I did not).  So exactly how does one go about getting this discernment without having discernment ?  As a former militant atheist yourself, i'm sure you can tell us a logical way to gain discernment when you think it is all BS,  I await. 


Forgive the length of the post but Scripture speaks for itself:  You receive the Holy Spirit as a free gift from God at the point of your Salvation when you respond to the Holy Spirit's conviction revealing the spiritual significance of your need due to man's sin nature and understanding the significance of Jesus Christ sacrifice on the Cross being our atoning sacrifice for our sins (past/present/future).

 

John 14:15 (NIV)
15 "If you love me, you will obey what I command.   

John 14:16 (NIV)
16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever--   

John 14:17 (NIV)
17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.   

John 14:18 (NIV)
18 I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.   

John 14:19 (NIV)
19 Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live.   

John 14:20 (NIV)
20 On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.  

Acts 1:5 (NIV)
5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."   

Acts 8:17 (NIV)
17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.   

Acts 19:2 (NIV)
2 and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"  They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."   

Acts 19:3 (NIV)
3 So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?"  "John's baptism," they replied.   

Acts 19:4 (NIV)
4 Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus."   

Acts 19:6 (NIV)
6 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.   

Romans 1:4 (NIV)
4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.   

Romans 8:1 (NLT)
1 So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus.  

Romans 8:2 (NLT)
2 And because you belong to him, the power of the life-giving Spirit has freed you from the power of sin that leads to death.  

Romans 8:3 (NLT)
3 The law of Moses was unable to save us because of the weakness of our sinful nature. So God did what the law could not do. He sent his own Son in a body like the bodies we sinners have. And in that body God declared an end to sin’s control over us by giving his Son as a sacrifice for our sins.  

Romans 8:4 (NLT)
4 He did this so that the just requirement of the law would be fully satisfied for us, who no longer follow our sinful nature but instead follow the Spirit. 

Romans 8:5 (NLT)
5 Those who are dominated by the sinful nature think about sinful things, but those who are controlled by the Holy Spirit think about things that please the Spirit.  

Romans 8:6 (NLT)
6 So letting your sinful nature control your mind leads to death. But letting the Spirit control your mind leads to life and peace. 

Romans 8:7 (NLT)
7 For the sinful nature is always hostile to God. It never did obey God’s laws, and it never will. 


Romans 8:8 (NLT)
8 That’s why those who are still under the control of their sinful nature can never please God. 

Romans 8:9 (NLT)
9 But you are not controlled by your sinful nature. You are controlled by the Spirit if you have the Spirit of God living in you. (And remember that those who do not have the Spirit of Christ living in them do not belong to him at all.)  

Romans 8:10 (NLT)
10 And Christ lives within you, so even though your body will die because of sin, the Spirit gives you life because you have been made right with God.  

Romans 8:11 (NLT)
11 The Spirit of God, who raised Jesus from the dead, lives in you. And just as God raised Christ Jesus from the dead, he will give life to your mortal bodies by this same Spirit living within you.  

Romans 8:12 (NLT)
12 Therefore, dear brothers and sisters, you have no obligation to do what your sinful nature urges you to do.  

Romans 8:13 (NLT)
13 For if you live by its dictates, you will die. But if through the power of the Spirit you put to death the deeds of your sinful nature, you will live.  

Romans 8:14 (NLT)
14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. 

1 Corinthians 2:10 (CEV)
10 God's Spirit has shown you everything. His Spirit finds out everything, even what is deep in the mind of God.   

1 Corinthians 2:11 (CEV)
11 You are the only one who knows what is in your own mind, and God's Spirit is the only one who knows what is in God's mind.   

1 Corinthians 2:12 (CEV)
12 But God has given us his Spirit. That's why we don't think the same way that the people of this world think. That's also why we can recognize the blessings that God has given us.  

1 Corinthians 2:13 (CEV)
13 Every word we speak was taught to us by God's Spirit, not by human wisdom. And this same Spirit helps us teach spiritual things to spiritual people.   

1 Corinthians 2:14 (CEV)
14 That's why only someone who has God's Spirit can understand spiritual blessings. Anyone who doesn't have God's Spirit thinks these blessings are foolish.   

1 Corinthians 3:16 (NIV)
16 Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?   

1 Corinthians 6:19 (NIV)
19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;  

2 Corinthians 3:3 (NIV)
3 You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.   

Ephesians 1:13 (NIV)
13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,   

Ephesians 2:18 (NIV)
18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.   

Ephesians 2:22 (NIV)
22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.   

Ephesians 3:20 (NIV)
20 Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us,   

Ephesians 4:30 (NIV)
30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.  

1 Thessalonians 4:7 (NIV)
7 For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life.  
8 Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit.     

The Holy Spirit (God the Holy Spirit) is a Gift of God the Father upon salvation (acceptance of Jesus Christ sacrifice for each of us.  We are to believe and accept Christ as His sacrifice is/was the atonement for our sins.  There is Water baptism to symbolize that we have been saved and identify us with Christ Jesus and as a testimony of our new life in Christ but Baptism of the Holy Spirit comes from God at the moment of our Salvation.  That point comes when God the Holy Spirit opens your spiritual eyes revealing your spiritual need for salvation.

 

 

 

 

Originally Posted by gbrk:

 

See uno I give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't see it or read it.  I know you wouldn't say something so crazy so I repeated it.  You ask a question and I answered ...  unsurprisingly ummm .. no reply expected.  Again either read above or go to my post back to you responding at 1:54 PM earlier. 

GB, lie Bill's rambling posts, you go on far too long so, no, I didn't read all your post so, yes, I missed  this answer.

And you are right, I don't accept it.  I am certain that you and Ono could go through the bible and come up with disagreements on all sorts of laws.  In fact, I bet your disagreements would be about the same number of disagreements you'd have with an atheist over moral issues,

Example, I bet Ono supports *** marriage.  You almost certainty do not.  Ono accepts the overwhelming evidence for evolution, you absolutely do not. Ono does not accept the "Once saved, always saved" but I bet you do and if you don't, Bill certainly does.

And you all three possess this gift of "spiritual discernment" that you both insist I do not have and never had.

So how can it be that you both have this give to "properly" interpret the bible yet you both disagree over such important matters?  I know the answer here.  Do you? 

Originally Posted by O No!:
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
What the Jews do is between them and God. None of my business.

 

Ah yes.  That is similar to what the Pope said to one of Hitler's henchmen.  "Do what you want to their bodies . Their souls belong to God."

No, Ono, we as a race should care about these people just as they would care about us.  The inhumane treatment they received from people that believe just like you is inexcusable.  What I quoted from Deuteronomy was just as horrid then as it is now.  Your god that you love so much actually demanded that entire cities be destroyed, all the womane kidnapped and babies thrown against the rocks.

There is no amount of "spiritual discernment" that will make that any less repugnant. 

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by O No!:
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
What the Jews do is between them and God. None of my business.

 

Ah yes.  That is similar to what the Pope said to one of Hitler's henchmen.  "Do what you want to their bodies . Their souls belong to God."

No, Ono, we as a race should care about these people just as they would care about us.  The inhumane treatment they received from people that believe just like you is inexcusable.  What I quoted from Deuteronomy was just as horrid then as it is now.  Your god that you love so much actually demanded that entire cities be destroyed, all the womane kidnapped and babies thrown against the rocks.

There is no amount of "spiritual discernment" that will make that any less repugnant. 


Wow, you sure do know how to twist someone's words, don't you? Because I am not Jewish and don't choose to try to explain their faith, suddenly I am another Hitler?! Keeping my nose out of their religion means I want them to have inhumane treatment? Are you THAT desperate to make a point that you will twist what a Christian says to make them look like the bad guy, even when they never said any such thing?

 

If you think that "we as a race should care about these people" (and I'm not saying we shouldn't ), why is it that in my Faith and Patriotism thread, you basically said that everyone should get a job. Don't YOU care about the elderly and the sick? *I* think the inhumane treatment THEY are getting from people who believe just like YOU do is inexcusable.

 

I do know one thing though - no amount of spiritual discernment will make people who intentionally misunderstand, twist people's words, insult ,and try to debase my Lord, any less repugnant.

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by O No!:
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
What the Jews do is between them and God. None of my business.

 

Ah yes.  That is similar to what the Pope said to one of Hitler's henchmen.  "Do what you want to their bodies . Their souls belong to God."

No, Ono, we as a race should care about these people just as they would care about us.  The inhumane treatment they received from people that believe just like you is inexcusable.  What I quoted from Deuteronomy was just as horrid then as it is now.  Your god that you love so much actually demanded that entire cities be destroyed, all the womane kidnapped and babies thrown against the rocks.

There is no amount of "spiritual discernment" that will make that any less repugnant. 

================unoi

you think it is ok for a mother to kill her baby. You don't make me want to be atheistic.

No amount of atheistic descernment makes that less repugnant.

You advocate ripping l'il babies apart while they are alive and kicking.

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
... I bet Ono supports *** marriage.  You almost certainty do not.  Ono accepts the overwhelming evidence for evolution, you absolutely do not. Ono does not accept the "Once saved, always saved" but I bet you do and if you don't, Bill certainly does.


And you all three possess this gift of "spiritual discernment" that you both insist I do not have and never had.

So how can it be that you both have this give to "properly" interpret the bible yet you both disagree over such important matters? ...

I would enjoy and answer to this too please. Since it's often stated in this forum that we atheists cannot understand Christians and their god for apparently lacking a the magic of the Holy Ghost and are spiritually blind and all that. I too wonder how people supposedly indwelled and guided by the Holy Spirit on spiritual matters cannot agree on God's words on how we should behave. Apologies, if this is already answered and lost in some punishing rant.

Originally Posted by Rramnlimnn_TheGreat:

gbrk, unoi ignores me so ask him how it feels to have with intent blasphemed the HOLY GHOST.

I was just wondering if he wakes up with night sweats regretting what he done.

Ask him gbrk.

Your post is copied above so unless I'm ignored it should be readable.  I was not aware that the ignore feature had been reinstated on the forums.  Where is it at?

It HAS been answered before, but here it is again: Our God is a PERSONAL God. He is my best friend, and when the Holy Spirit tells me do do something, He is not telling GB, or Bill, or anyone else - just me. The Holy Spirit and the Bible BOTH tell me it is not my place to judge others, and while God doesn't like homosexuality, He doesn't like other sins either. I can tell you He dislikes atheism even more, but I will not judge atheists or g a y s or anyone else.

 

Other Christians may not get the same message. It is MY job to do certain things on this earth while I am here, and the jobs of other people to do other things. Maybe it is the job of someone else to try to prevent g a y marriage, but it is not mine.

 

I accept BOTH the Bible and evolution. I believe that one of God's "days" was a WHOLE lot longer than our days. Some people may not have gotten that message. They may have gotten a different message having to do with whatever it is God wants them to do in their time here on earth.

 

I don't believe in "once saved, always saved" because although God would never take away the gift of Jesus, there are some who willingly throw it away. I don't think GB believes in it either, although as we all know, Bill does.

 

We DO all have jobs to do here, and our Lord provides us with the tools and the knowledge to do those jobs. I may get a phillips head and a blueprint of one part of the machine, while GB might get a wrench and a blueprint of a different part. I think He gave Bill a hammer but I can't judge him or how he uses it because I have not seen the blueprints he was given.

 

I know you want to cause an argument between Christians, but it won't work. We each have things we must do with the understanding we have been given, but as long as what we are doing is being done for God, it doesn't matter whether or not we agree with what EACH OTHER is doing. It'll all turn out gloriously beautiful in the end.

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by gbrk:

 

See uno I give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't see it or read it.  I know you wouldn't say something so crazy so I repeated it.  You ask a question and I answered ...  unsurprisingly ummm .. no reply expected.  Again either read above or go to my post back to you responding at 1:54 PM earlier. 

GB, lie Bill's rambling posts, you go on far too long so, no, I didn't read all your post so, yes, I missed  this answer.

And you are right, I don't accept it.  I am certain that you and Ono could go through the bible and come up with disagreements on all sorts of laws.  In fact, I bet your disagreements would be about the same number of disagreements you'd have with an atheist over moral issues,

Example, I bet Ono supports *** marriage.  You almost certainty do not.  Ono accepts the overwhelming evidence for evolution, you absolutely do not. Ono does not accept the "Once saved, always saved" but I bet you do and if you don't, Bill certainly does.

And you all three possess this gift of "spiritual discernment" that you both insist I do not have and never had.

So how can it be that you both have this give to "properly" interpret the bible yet you both disagree over such important matters?  I know the answer here.  Do you? 

You never accept our statements regarding the Bible but you ask so I'll answer.  God gives unto those Christians who ask and seek spiritual discernment from the Scriptures.  Any Christian should be willing to admit that God may have a special message or will for one person that differs from the other.  Additionally different Christians, in their spiritual lives grow at different rates.  Even Paul acknowledged that he could talk about some topics with some people and not with others because of their Spiritual maturity so no every Christian will believe alike. 

 

While this can, and at times, does cause dissension among the believers it should not for Romans 14 addresses Christians different beliefs but instructs all Christians to live in Love.  Disagreements in interpretation of Scripture is why you see a lot of different denominations.  Being HUMAN is why there are many disagreements and dissensions between Christians.  Christians are not perfect by accepting Christ even though in God's eyes as far as our sins we appear as perfect which means we are not judged for our sins.  Christians are not perfect in reality or the flesh but we are forgiven..  Being forgiven and the Holy Spirit's presence is what separates Christians from everyone else that is Human and subject to the same human flaws.

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by O No!:
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
What the Jews do is between them and God. None of my business.

 

Ah yes.  That is similar to what the Pope said to one of Hitler's henchmen.  "Do what you want to their bodies . Their souls belong to God."

No, Ono, we as a race should care about these people just as they would care about us.  The inhumane treatment they received from people that believe just like you is inexcusable.  What I quoted from Deuteronomy was just as horrid then as it is now.  Your god that you love so much actually demanded that entire cities be destroyed, all the womane kidnapped and babies thrown against the rocks.

There is no amount of "spiritual discernment" that will make that any less repugnant. 

I hate to be the bearer of bad news for you and the other atheist who plan on using this as an excuse not to believe.  If God exist, as we proclaim to you He does, and after death you do appear before God I can assure you that saying you are evil or that you killed all those people so I couldn't accept  you is not going to fly.   That same ole excuse is used by atheist world wide and I'm fairly sure some atheist somewhere has a patient or trademark on it.    You have a hard time understanding that it takes the Holy Spirit to understand spiritual significance in the Scriptures but you cannot seem to comprehend the historical text as written.  I suggest you and others see what you want to see to justify your non-belief or rejection of God.

Originally Posted by Rramnlimnn_TheGreat:
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by O No!:
Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
What the Jews do is between them and God. None of my business.

 

Ah yes.  That is similar to what the Pope said to one of Hitler's henchmen.  "Do what you want to their bodies . Their souls belong to God."

No, Ono, we as a race should care about these people just as they would care about us.  The inhumane treatment they received from people that believe just like you is inexcusable.  What I quoted from Deuteronomy was just as horrid then as it is now.  Your god that you love so much actually demanded that entire cities be destroyed, all the womane kidnapped and babies thrown against the rocks.

There is no amount of "spiritual discernment" that will make that any less repugnant. 

================unoi

you think it is ok for a mother to kill her baby. You don't make me want to be atheistic.

No amount of atheistic descernment makes that less repugnant.

You advocate ripping l'il babies apart while they are alive and kicking.

Actually that's a very astute point.  Many atheist care not the least about the unborn being aborted and killed and many in any state before birth yet they want to accuse God of being cruel?  I'm curious to see how they respond to this one?

Originally Posted by gbrk:

I think it's more that they are jilted because God doesn't come down from Heaven and appear in front of their very eyes.  They further are enraged that these simpleton Christians might actually have some contact and something from God that they don't have and cannot realize. 


Think about it Ram,   from a psychological standpoint and view anyone that is effected by some form of jealousy usually manifest that emotion, eventually, in anger or some form of anger such as verbal or potentially, eventually physical as for relationships.  On here though we see manifestations of anger in the form of insults since really there is no other way to voice anger and aggression.  From Scripture we understand also that anger is a result of being led by the fleshly nature rather than being led by the Holy Spirit of Christ.. 


This is why they are so opposed to Scripture.  Not because we consider it the Word of God but because it IS the Word of God and the very words of scripture convicts them of their actions.  If it was truly a case of non-belief then they would never mention it twice but ignore it.  Because though it strikes a note, a chord, within their inner spirit/mind they abhor it, they find it offensive for it effects them because it cuts to the bone.  No there are reasons for the insults and they are the same now as they were in Christ day.  The exact same motivation creates the inner aggression which is fed and amplified by anger.  So enjoy the insults for Christ and the Disciples suffered the same in Christ Name. 


Sorry GBRK, I like you, but this is psychobabel of the worst kind.

Originally Posted by O No!:

It HAS been answered before, but here it is again: Our God is a PERSONAL God. He is my best friend, and when the Holy Spirit tells me do do something, He is not telling GB, or Bill, or anyone else - just me. The Holy Spirit and the Bible BOTH tell me it is not my place to judge others, and while God doesn't like homosexuality, He doesn't like other sins either. I can tell you He dislikes atheism even more, but I will not judge atheists or g a y s or anyone else.

 

Other Christians may not get the same message. It is MY job to do certain things on this earth while I am here, and the jobs of other people to do other things. Maybe it is the job of someone else to try to prevent g a y marriage, but it is not mine.

 

I accept BOTH the Bible and evolution. I believe that one of God's "days" was a WHOLE lot longer than our days. Some people may not have gotten that message. They may have gotten a different message having to do with whatever it is God wants them to do in their time here on earth.

 

I don't believe in "once saved, always saved" because although God would never take away the gift of Jesus, there are some who willingly throw it away. I don't think GB believes in it either, although as we all know, Bill does.

 

We DO all have jobs to do here, and our Lord provides us with the tools and the knowledge to do those jobs. I may get a phillips head and a blueprint of one part of the machine, while GB might get a wrench and a blueprint of a different part. I think He gave Bill a hammer but I can't judge him or how he uses it because I have not seen the blueprints he was given.

 

I know you want to cause an argument between Christians, but it won't work. We each have things we must do with the understanding we have been given, but as long as what we are doing is being done for God, it doesn't matter whether or not we agree with what EACH OTHER is doing. It'll all turn out gloriously beautiful in the end.

Excellent Post O No I will only add a scripture to it:

 

Romans 12:1-14 (NLT)
1 And so, dear brothers and sisters, I plead with you to give your bodies to God because of all he has done for you. Let them be a living and holy sacrifice—the kind he will find acceptable. This is truly the way to worship him.
2 Don’t copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will learn to know God’s will for you, which is good and pleasing and perfect.
3 Because of the privilege and authority God has given me, I give each of you this warning: Don’t think you are better than you really are. Be honest in your evaluation of yourselves, measuring yourselves by the faith God has given us.
4 Just as our bodies have many parts and each part has a special function,
5 so it is with Christ’s body. We are many parts of one body, and we all belong to each other.
6 In his grace, God has given us different gifts for doing certain things well. So if God has given you the ability to prophesy, speak out with as much faith as God has given you.
7 If your gift is serving others, serve them well. If you are a teacher, teach well.
8 If your gift is to encourage others, be encouraging. If it is giving, give generously. If God has given you leadership ability, take the responsibility seriously. And if you have a gift for showing kindness to others, do it gladly.
9 Don’t just pretend to love others. Really love them. Hate what is wrong. Hold tightly to what is good.
10 Love each other with genuine affection, and take delight in honoring each other.
11 Never be lazy, but work hard and serve the Lord enthusiastically.
12 Rejoice in our confident hope. Be patient in trouble, and keep on praying.
13 When God’s people are in need, be ready to help them. Always be eager to practice hospitality.
14 Bless those who persecute you. Don’t curse them; pray that God will bless them.

Originally Posted by O No!:

...I know you want to cause an argument between Christians, but it won't work. We each have things we must do with the understanding we have been given, but as long as what we are doing is being done for God, it doesn't matter whether or not we agree with what EACH OTHER is doing. It'll all turn out gloriously beautiful in the end.

Thanks for the answer O.

 

As to your allegation of wanting to cause arguments between Christians, oh come on. You believe in the atheist conspiracy stuff too? You guys hate on each other so much better when we're not around. We're catching the blame for Christian-on-Christian disagreements too? DANG

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by gbrk:

I think it's more that they are jilted because God doesn't come down from Heaven and appear in front of their very eyes.  They further are enraged that these simpleton Christians might actually have some contact and something from God that they don't have and cannot realize. 


Think about it Ram,   from a psychological standpoint and view anyone that is effected by some form of jealousy usually manifest that emotion, eventually, in anger or some form of anger such as verbal or potentially, eventually physical as for relationships.  On here though we see manifestations of anger in the form of insults since really there is no other way to voice anger and aggression.  From Scripture we understand also that anger is a result of being led by the fleshly nature rather than being led by the Holy Spirit of Christ.. 


This is why they are so opposed to Scripture.  Not because we consider it the Word of God but because it IS the Word of God and the very words of scripture convicts them of their actions.  If it was truly a case of non-belief then they would never mention it twice but ignore it.  Because though it strikes a note, a chord, within their inner spirit/mind they abhor it, they find it offensive for it effects them because it cuts to the bone.  No there are reasons for the insults and they are the same now as they were in Christ day.  The exact same motivation creates the inner aggression which is fed and amplified by anger.  So enjoy the insults for Christ and the Disciples suffered the same in Christ Name. 


Sorry GBRK, I like you, but this is psychobabel of the worst kind.

I think it has a lot to do with the following:

 

Romans 8:5-8 (NLT)
5 Those who are dominated by the sinful nature think about sinful things, but those who are controlled by the Holy Spirit think about things that please the Spirit.
6 So letting your sinful nature control your mind leads to death. But letting the Spirit control your mind leads to life and peace.
7 For the sinful nature is always hostile to God. It never did obey God’s laws, and it never will.
8 That’s why those who are still under the control of their sinful nature can never please God.

 

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by gbrk:

I think it's more that they are jilted because God doesn't come down from Heaven and appear in front of their very eyes.  They further are enraged that these simpleton Christians might actually have some contact and something from God that they don't have and cannot realize. 


Think about it Ram,   from a psychological standpoint and view anyone that is effected by some form of jealousy usually manifest that emotion, eventually, in anger or some form of anger such as verbal or potentially, eventually physical as for relationships.  On here though we see manifestations of anger in the form of insults since really there is no other way to voice anger and aggression.  From Scripture we understand also that anger is a result of being led by the fleshly nature rather than being led by the Holy Spirit of Christ.. 


This is why they are so opposed to Scripture.  Not because we consider it the Word of God but because it IS the Word of God and the very words of scripture convicts them of their actions.  If it was truly a case of non-belief then they would never mention it twice but ignore it.  Because though it strikes a note, a chord, within their inner spirit/mind they abhor it, they find it offensive for it effects them because it cuts to the bone.  No there are reasons for the insults and they are the same now as they were in Christ day.  The exact same motivation creates the inner aggression which is fed and amplified by anger.  So enjoy the insults for Christ and the Disciples suffered the same in Christ Name. 


Sorry GBRK, I like you, but this is psychobabel of the worst kind.

========sez you crust. You don't have much of a background in psychology it appears.

Classic interpretation by gbrk.

Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by gbrk:

...Many atheist care not the least about the unborn being aborted...

This. Is. Ridiculous.

==========================why Adot abortion is one of your power points and it seems always to be coming from those have never had a v a gina. What gives?
I wish you would shut up and let the women folks talk about. Its not your decision now is it?

How old I am has nothing to do with anything. I responded to gb's statement that "many atheist care not the least about the unborn being aborted" by posting that many christians didn't give a flip about babies being aborted either, which is absolutely true. Gb will do as usual and accuse me of saying she didn't care about aborted babies, and will post it over and over and demand proof that she doesn't care. Just letting her know I'm prepared for them.

Originally Posted by Jennifer:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by gbrk:

...Many atheist care not the least about the unborn being aborted...

This. Is. Ridiculous.


Many christians don't give a flip either. Now run and make 50 posts saying I said you didn't care.

Now you come into a different subject and resurrect a post that you still are bitter about getting called on.  For those who know not what we are talking about here is what was said BY JENNIFER.


There's just no "talking" to you gb. I don't know why you bother to ask questions because after you get the answers you just post the same thing again like you didn't get it. This is not a forum FOR CHRISTIANS ONLY. Got it yet? And what part of the explanation we gave you about why we're here are you just not getting or refusing to understand??

 

add to that post another Jennifer made which states

GB, get over it. It is not for christians only and all the whining in the world from you won't change that.

Your implication was that I was whining to get the Religion forum for Christians ONLY and was incorrect.  You could not post one place I said such because it never happened. 

 

 

then this one:

 

Well gb, you can whine all you want to whine but the TD did not make this forum for christians only, ramn is not right about atheists objecting to christians on their forums, he goes to them all the time, and if he says he doesn't post on them he's lying. So hang it up. I called you a simpleton because you keep acting like one, asking the same question over and over like some petulent child.



Anyone of basic intelligence, unless they don't want to see, can see you addressed it to ME when you said whine all you want but the TD did not make this forum for Christians only.  Add them up and you are implying that is what I desired or ask for. 


Frankly Jennifer you seem to be a bitter old female who is the one whining and throwing a piitty fit because you are revealed for what you are (deceitful)..  Pride and refusal to acknowledge your mistakes is not worth any more of my time.  Your post speak for themselves your bitterness is getting ugly.  You are just not worth the effort to attempt to discuss it rationally anymore.  ANY person that analyzed the sentence that has a the most basic intelligence would see you implied what I said you implied so much so that RP also picked up on your statements when he said the same in one of his post..  At first I thought it stemmed from just your pride and bitterness and now you are just obsessed with an corruptness that overwhelms you. You constantly deny what you obviously do and alter the meaning of what others says without care or concern and anyone should take anything you say with skepticism for you certainly cannot be trusted and that is ever more apparent the longer I read your post. 

 

If there is a way to block/ignore my post I suggest you do for you have demonstrated yourself to be too bitter to reason with.  If I can block/ignore your post rest assured I will and allow you to waste away in your own decrepit conscience, strike that you appear to have none just ugly bitterness and the arrogance of a morally bankrupt individual who allows her hatred of Christians to obsess her and her actions on this forum.    If you don't care to read my diatribes ignore me if possible because I plan to ignore you if possible for you are beyond reasoning with and you will continue to be bitter which will continue within you.  Others see you for who you are as well and the only ones who can't are your fellow atheist whom share the same agenda for your participation here.  Not dialog but attacks and insults against Christians.  That same bitterness and carnal heart/conscience creates that as well and that is the real reason you post here and not to be constructive.  You ARE the atheist equivalent of the members of the Westboro Baptist Church who protest the funerals of soldiers .. exactly the same for you do what you want because you have the freedom to and you don't care who gets in your way.  As I said a bitter vengeful empty woman who cannot find happiness within so seeks to take it out on everyone else you blame for your own personal misery which is why you cannot see what you did because you frankly don't care.

Last edited by gbrk
Old Faithful
 
Yesterday at 10:21 PM
 

Maybe you should look up the definition of bitter. Seems you have no idea of the difference in bitter and just tired of dealing with a childish person. And gb, people can read, and if they really care, which I seriously doubt, they can read the order of the posts and why i finally told you what I did. KISS

 
 
 
<script type="text/javascript"></script>
 
 
Old Faithful
 
Yesterday at 10:24 PM
 

Don't project your sad life onto me gb. Every time you get confronted your mask slips.

 

 

 

 

THIS is why I ask your age. What a childish response. Almost as bad as the one above these. Just about everyone here has commented on your anger and bitterness. If you weren't so angry and bitter, your posts would show some civility instead of such immaturity. You have claimed in the past that you don't CARE what others think, and that is yet  ANOTHER sign of anger, bitterness, and your inability to deal with them.

 

Most of us here can get into discussions, even heated discussions, without resorting to pettiness and the equivalent of nose-thumbing that you seem to fall back on so frequently. You seem to want to actually try to say something, unlike the trolls of the forum who like to spit out one line insults to all. And yet, because your language is so inflammatory, any meaning in your posts is lost to most readers in their surprise at the bitterness you display.

 

It's too bad, because it is obvious you are intelligent and COULD contribute much to these discussions. It just seems that your emotional immaturity usually prevents that from happening.

Originally Posted by rum_mama:

Good Lordy!  Looks like the old Gal jennifer got whats call a "virtual beat-down". And a good one at that. Best one I seen . LOL!

================================================================

Ach, so... Ich wurde verwechselt.

 

Du bist nicht ein Buffel....

 

Ich habe jetzt Ihre zahl......

 

 


 

Hi Deep,

You tell us, "The real 'smoke screen' is to be found in Apologetics Press.  I've been familiar with them for 30 years.  There is no level of dishonesty to which they will not stoop.  Truth is not their aim.  Winning an argument is.  In the larger sense, they lose every time."

I see that you have visited the "About Apologetics Press | What We Produce" page of their web site.  That is good.  We can see where you got your30 year fact. 

 

At least you are showing some initiative even if you keep denying what you have learned.  For the sake of our Religion Forum Friends, let's share what you found on this web page:


+++++++++++++++++++++++


Apologetics Press | What We Produce
http://www.apologeticspress.org/whatwepro.aspx


For more than 30 years Apologetics Press has published and disseminated materials for self study, group study, or evangelistic purposes.  Topics range from evidences supporting the Christian Faith to highly controversial areas that challenge that Faith.  Every two years we prepare a catalog of A.P. publications.

Reason & Revelation  Since 1981, Apologetics Press has published a monthly journal on Christian evidences.   Dr. Dave Miller serves as the editor.  Reason & Revelation is a central teaching medium of Apologetics Press.  In its pages appear articles on such topics as God’s existence, the inspiration of the Bible, the creation/evolution controversy, the deity of Christ, ethics, the culture war, etc.  Typically, each issue includes a feature article and one or two shorter articles.  The subject matter deals with current issues and draws on the most recent sources whenever possible.

Discovery:   Since 1990, Apologetics Press has published Discovery, a monthly magazine on Scripture and science for kids.   Articles are aimed primarily at children in the 4th through 6th grades, although many different age groups enjoy Discovery.  Kyle Butt serves as editor; Eric Lyons serves as associate editor.

Books:   Apologetics Press publishes numerous high quality, inexpensively priced books.  For children, we have offerings for virtually every age group: the Apologetics Press Reader series consisting of three levels of reading books -- Learn to Read, Early Readers, and Advanced Readers; Bible story rhyming books; a dinosaur coloring book (in both English and Spanish); Creation Cards for infants; books for teens that may be used as classroom curricula; and several other volumes that are critical in preparing young people to withstand the influence of evolution, including our highly acclaimed books Dinosaurs Unleashed and Truth Be Told.

For adults, we have books on alleged Bible discrepancies (The Anvil Rings, Vols. 1 & 2), general Christian evidences (e.g.,  Surveying the Evidence), the errors of evolution (e.g., The Truth About Human Origins, The Dinosaur Dilemma), culture war issues (e.g., The Silencing of God -- Christ & the Continental Congress -- Sexual Anarchy, etc.), non-Christian religion (e.g., The Quran Unveiled), and a host of other volumes.

Tracts:   We have an extensive listing of tracts on Christian apologetics and Christian evidences, as well as general Bible topics.   These can be placed in tract racks at church buildings, used in community outreach programs, or employed as handouts in Bible classes. Tracts may be ordered individually, by hundreds, or by thousands (volume discounts apply).  A sample pack containing one of each tract is available for purchase.

Research Article Series The Apologetics Press Research Article Series includes fully documented discussions on special topics dealing with apologetics and evidences.  Research Articles cover current issues on the creation/evolution controversy, the resurrection of Christ, alleged Bible contradictions, medical ethics, God’s existence, and many others.  All Research Articles are available on our Web site free of charge.  [Most Research Articles are available on this Web site in a PDF format and may be  downloaded and printed.]

+++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Deep, my Friend, thank you for reminding me to give the information above to our Religion Forum Friends.  Another wonderful source of Christian Apologetics information can be found on the The Institute for Creation Research web site:  http://www.icr.org

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Originally Posted by Jennifer:

How old I am has nothing to do with anything. I responded to gb's statement that "many atheist care not the least about the unborn being aborted" by posting that many christians didn't give a flip about babies being aborted either, which is absolutely true. Gb will do as usual and accuse me of saying she didn't care about aborted babies, and will post it over and over and demand proof that she doesn't care. Just letting her know I'm prepared for them.

They are not "babies" until they are born. Christians and conservatives only care about them when they are in the womb. Once they are born, they are on their own.

Originally Posted by Bill Gray:

Hi Deep,

You tell us, "The real 'smoke screen' is to be found in Apologetics Press.  I've been familiar with them for 30 years.  There is no level of dishonesty to which they will not stoop.  Truth is not their aim.  Winning an argument is.  In the larger sense, they lose every time."

I see that you have visited the "About Apologetics Press | What We Produce" page of their web site.  That is good.  We can see where you got your30 year fact. 

 

At least you are showing some initiative even if you keep denying what you have learned.  For the sake of our Religion Forum Friends, let's share what you found on this web page:


+++++++++++++++++++++++


Apologetics Press | What We Produce
http://www.apologeticspress.org/whatwepro.aspx


For more than 30 years Apologetics Press has published and disseminated materials for self study, group study, or evangelistic purposes.  Topics range from evidences supporting the Christian Faith to highly controversial areas that challenge that Faith.  Every two years we prepare a catalog of A.P. publications.

Reason & Revelation  Since 1981, Apologetics Press has published a monthly journal on Christian evidences.   Dr. Dave Miller serves as the editor.  Reason & Revelation is a central teaching medium of Apologetics Press.  In its pages appear articles on such topics as God’s existence, the inspiration of the Bible, the creation/evolution controversy, the deity of Christ, ethics, the culture war, etc.  Typically, each issue includes a feature article and one or two shorter articles.  The subject matter deals with current issues and draws on the most recent sources whenever possible.

Discovery:   Since 1990, Apologetics Press has published Discovery, a monthly magazine on Scripture and science for kids.   Articles are aimed primarily at children in the 4th through 6th grades, although many different age groups enjoy Discovery.  Kyle Butt serves as editor; Eric Lyons serves as associate editor.

Books:   Apologetics Press publishes numerous high quality, inexpensively priced books.  For children, we have offerings for virtually every age group: the Apologetics Press Reader series consisting of three levels of reading books -- Learn to Read, Early Readers, and Advanced Readers; Bible story rhyming books; a dinosaur coloring book (in both English and Spanish); Creation Cards for infants; books for teens that may be used as classroom curricula; and several other volumes that are critical in preparing young people to withstand the influence of evolution, including our highly acclaimed books Dinosaurs Unleashed and Truth Be Told.

For adults, we have books on alleged Bible discrepancies (The Anvil Rings, Vols. 1 & 2), general Christian evidences (e.g.,  Surveying the Evidence), the errors of evolution (e.g., The Truth About Human Origins, The Dinosaur Dilemma), culture war issues (e.g., The Silencing of God -- Christ & the Continental Congress -- Sexual Anarchy, etc.), non-Christian religion (e.g., The Quran Unveiled), and a host of other volumes.

Tracts:   We have an extensive listing of tracts on Christian apologetics and Christian evidences, as well as general Bible topics.   These can be placed in tract racks at church buildings, used in community outreach programs, or employed as handouts in Bible classes. Tracts may be ordered individually, by hundreds, or by thousands (volume discounts apply).  A sample pack containing one of each tract is available for purchase.

Research Article Series The Apologetics Press Research Article Series includes fully documented discussions on special topics dealing with apologetics and evidences.  Research Articles cover current issues on the creation/evolution controversy, the resurrection of Christ, alleged Bible contradictions, medical ethics, God’s existence, and many others.  All Research Articles are available on our Web site free of charge.  [Most Research Articles are available on this Web site in a PDF format and may be  downloaded and printed.]

+++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Deep, my Friend, thank you for reminding me to give the information above to our Religion Forum Friends.  Another wonderful source of Christian Apologetics information can be found on the The Institute for Creation Research web site:  http://www.icr.org

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

The Institute for Creation Research is always good for a laugh or two. They are crazier than Bill, if that is even possible. When the only research you do is in a fictional Bible, the results are not very informative.

 

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by Jennifer:

How old I am has nothing to do with anything. I responded to gb's statement that "many atheist care not the least about the unborn being aborted" by posting that many christians didn't give a flip about babies being aborted either, which is absolutely true. Gb will do as usual and accuse me of saying she didn't care about aborted babies, and will post it over and over and demand proof that she doesn't care. Just letting her know I'm prepared for them.

They are not "babies" until they are born. Christians and conservatives only care about them when they are in the womb. Once they are born, they are on their own.

=====================

that post of yours jimbo allows that you are guilty of "criminal indifference"[Seinfeld] and should be separated from society for such time required to  rehabilitate  your non-congruent attitude to recognized norms agreed upon by the majority by chemical, psychological or electric shock.

quote:   Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
The Institute for Creation Research is always good for a laugh or two. They are crazier than Bill, if that is even possible. When the only research you do is in a fictional Bible, the results are not very informative.

Hi Jimi,

 

My Friend, I seriously doubt you had even heard of the Institute for Creation Research until I mentioned it.  And, I doubt you have ever read even one of their articles.  Yet, in your high intelligence (?) you can comment on the organization and their work -- without ever seeing it?

 

Okay, Jimi, you win -- you can spit further than me.  I concede -- at least that part -- to you.  

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Originally Posted by Rramnlimnn_TheGreat:

the majority of science is fictional jimmah. i've been there i know.

 

Darwin evolution is a fairy tale.

 

when you quit with making a fool out of yourself i'll know you have learned the big secret about science.

There is nothing left to say about how uneducated RtG is. He just gave us all of the information we need.

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by Rramnlimnn_TheGreat:

the majority of science is fictional jimmah. i've been there i know.

 

Darwin evolution is a fairy tale.

 

when you quit with making a fool out of yourself i'll know you have learned the big secret about science.

There is nothing left to say about how uneducated RtG is. He just gave us all of the information we need.

Whether you use, fiction, the word Rramn used or the one I would say which would be theoretical or hypothetical, his, yours, or mine are all subjective. A statement such as you made though about Rramn's intellect demonstrates, not analytical thinking but, a statement based in preconceived bias or prejudice.  While it may be rational to make judgments about someone based upon the sum of their abilities, acts, and contributions still you have such a infinitesimal sample of that  from here that any categorization of intelligence would still be more effected by your own biases than those of Rramms true intellect.  Either way if you still limited your samples to only what was demonstrated on this forum the sum of his contribution compared to yours, negate our respective beliefs, show concept of thought and reasoning, on his part, to your one word or simple terse playground insults.    

Also may I dare use an example.  I will credit you with a measure of intelligence as I would anyone on the forum but also wisdom is a measure of just how one uses the intellect that they have.  Some use it for constructive purpose while others destructive. Then some things just speak for themselves:

 

Attachments

Images (1)
  • Screen shot 2011-07-30 at 1.42.10 AM
Originally Posted by gbrk:
Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by Rramnlimnn_TheGreat:

the majority of science is fictional jimmah. i've been there i know.

 

Darwin evolution is a fairy tale.

 

when you quit with making a fool out of yourself i'll know you have learned the big secret about science.

There is nothing left to say about how uneducated RtG is. He just gave us all of the information we need.

Whether you use, fiction, the word Rramn used or the one I would say which would be theoretical or hypothetical, his, yours, or mine are all subjective. A statement such as you made though about Rramn's intellect demonstrates, not analytical thinking but, a statement based in preconceived bias or prejudice.  While it may be rational to make judgments about someone based upon the sum of their abilities, acts, and contributions still you have such a infinitesimal sample of that  from here that any categorization of intelligence would still be more effected by your own biases than those of Rramms true intellect.  Either way if you still limited your samples to only what was demonstrated on this forum the sum of his contribution compared to yours, negate our respective beliefs, show concept of thought and reasoning, on his part, to your one word or simple terse playground insults.    

Science is not fiction. This is not an opinion. Long posts do not always lead to the truth. RTG has demonstrated his ignorance about many things, on many occasions in this forum. The same may be said for you. My opinion of RTG is not based on any bias. It is based on my experience in reading his posts, some of which defy understanding. You, on the other hand write such long-winded posts, in the tradition of Bill, that I usually scroll through them without reading, as experience tells me what they will say, and that I will disagree with you. If this is unsatisfactory to you, you are free to scroll through mine, as well. It has no effect on me; if you are unhappy with me, I don't care. This is not a popularity contest.

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by gbrk:
<smipped for space>

Science is not fiction. This is not an opinion. Long posts do not always lead to the truth. RTG has demonstrated his ignorance about many things, on many occasions in this forum. The same may be said for you. My opinion of RTG is not based on any bias. It is based on my experience in reading his posts, some of which defy understanding. You, on the other hand write such long-winded posts, in the tradition of Bill, that I usually scroll through them without reading, as experience tells me what they will say, and that I will disagree with you. If this is unsatisfactory to you, you are free to scroll through mine, as well. It has no effect on me; if you are unhappy with me, I don't care. This is not a popularity contest.

Jimi,   Everything spoken is an opinion of the one speaking it.  Validity of the opinion is revealed based upon many factors but all statements are indeed opinion.  I agree that length of the post doesn't translate to truth nor does one word of short sentences.  All of the post, as with all of your post are Opinion, you should know and realize that.  

 

My long post are to hopefully an attempt to reveal reasoning behind the statements or beliefs I hold.  I'm not unhappy with you Jimi as I don't know you.  I am wondering why so often you choose to use such short terse demeaning comments yet spend so little explaining why you accept science with such unchallenged faith and allegiance.  At times you reveal a thinking rational individual and other times your post could be one that one could hear repeated on any elementary school playground.  I don't know if you are trying to be a troll or just obtuse.   

Originally Posted by gbrk:
Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by gbrk:
<smipped for space>

Science is not fiction. This is not an opinion. Long posts do not always lead to the truth. RTG has demonstrated his ignorance about many things, on many occasions in this forum. The same may be said for you. My opinion of RTG is not based on any bias. It is based on my experience in reading his posts, some of which defy understanding. You, on the other hand write such long-winded posts, in the tradition of Bill, that I usually scroll through them without reading, as experience tells me what they will say, and that I will disagree with you. If this is unsatisfactory to you, you are free to scroll through mine, as well. It has no effect on me; if you are unhappy with me, I don't care. This is not a popularity contest.

Jimi,   Everything spoken is an opinion of the one speaking it.  Validity of the opinion is revealed based upon many factors but all statements are indeed opinion.  I agree that length of the post doesn't translate to truth nor does one word of short sentences.  All of the post, as with all of your post are Opinion, you should know and realize that.  

 

My long post are to hopefully an attempt to reveal reasoning behind the statements or beliefs I hold.  I'm not unhappy with you Jimi as I don't know you.  I am wondering why so often you choose to use such short terse demeaning comments yet spend so little explaining why you accept science with such unchallenged faith and allegiance.  At times you reveal a thinking rational individual and other times your post could be one that one could hear repeated on any elementary school playground.  I don't know if you are trying to be a troll or just obtuse.   

By saying that everything is an opinion, it sounds like you don't believe in facts. IF that is true, then anyone can say anything and it will have equal validity with anything else that someone else says. Can you not see how crazy this would be? There is a reason why you will never see a sane person ask, "Do you be believe in gravity?", or "Do you believe in electricity?". The answer to either of those questions, if the answer comes from a sane person, will not be an opinion. If I tell you that gravity exists, and you deny it, you are a fool. Science is not opinion. You can call it anything you want but that will not make your opposing view anything other than a foolish statement. If you deny Evolution by Natural Selection, which is also Darwinian Evolution, then you must be either ignorant or a fool. You are not allowed to have opinions that are contrary to established fact and not be judged a fool by educated people. If you believe that every statement is an opinion, then you are indeed a fool.

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by gbrk:
<snipped for space and brevity>

By saying that everything is an opinion, it sounds like you don't believe in facts. IF that is true, then anyone can say anything and it will have equal validity with anything else that someone else says. Can you not see how crazy this would be? There is a reason why you will never see a sane person ask, "Do you be believe in gravity?", or "Do you believe in electricity?". The answer to either of those questions, if the answer comes from a sane person, will not be an opinion. If I tell you that gravity exists, and you deny it, you are a fool. Science is not opinion. You can call it anything you want but that will not make your opposing view anything other than a foolish statement. If you deny Evolution by Natural Selection, which is also Darwinian Evolution, then you must be either ignorant or a fool. You are not allowed to have opinions that are contrary to established fact and not be judged a fool by educated people. If you believe that every statement is an opinion, then you are indeed a fool.

No Jimi that is not what I am saying that I believe,  again read carefully and try without bias, Science is not an opinion however, I believe and state, that everything man says, writes, or believes IS an Opinion.  Man's/Woman/s opinion is based in information whether that information be, what you call facts, or theory or hypothesis.  Actually it is, my definition mind you, the theory or hypothesis that is a part of or a tool of science and science is the action where things are measured, observed, and tested with attempt to absolutely verify the hypothesis or theory.  Once the theory or hypothesis is verified and reproducible then one can consider it factual however still, in many cases, it is considered a theory for you, should realize that history is replete with facts that have had to be modified or rewritten.  Case in point Pluto being a planet.  So while I will accept that there are facts I would rather consider facts a fluid entity rather than dogmatic irrefutable, unchanging, and unquestionable substance.  A part of science is continual testing and challenging of facts, or so I believe that is a part of it.

 

As for religion or parts of Religion you have to, in my mind you have to, be objective enough to anticipate that there are entities and a realm apart from the physical.  I acknowledge and call this realm as the Spiritual and apart from that I envision the supreme the Origin as God.  Hypothetical or Theoretical certainly however unlike other theories or hypotheses Science can only test, sample, measure, realize, and quantify the Physical therefore science is insufficient to explain or even test the Spiritual.  This is why I have no problem saying Science will never prove God but likewise Science will never disprove God.  Currently as we have huge and monstrous colliders built around the world they are looking for theoretical particles.  Then even if they find these theoretical particles and verify they exist then they just verify a fraction of the overall theory.  A theory that quite likely is unverifiable being the origin and process of the Universe and that is from a Physical point of view.  Creation acknowledges God as the Origin and/or creator and the Spiritual Realm as the source of creation of the Physical.  To keep it from getting far too lengthy I will stop here but the reasoning behind everything man says being an opinion is that man accepts data and results or another person's conclusions as fact but man has no innate facts or factual data in the Physical realm or so that's how I believe it to be.  That is my Opinion.

Jimi, I thought quite possibly you were making an attempt to actually join in and participate in a dialog without going back to your short terse statements but while the deviation from the norm was welcome I suppose it was irrational to expect it to last.  

 

Regardless of your or my opinions or what they are based in those who read these post make the ultimate decisions so you can make as many proclamations as you wish.  Problem is that you isolate so many with your snide comments to or about them that you invalidate your own comments in most members eyes.  Even among those whom you agree with in the Religion forum you have made statements, on other forums, isolating you from them.  

 

You claim to be intelligent so let me ask you a few questions.


 

When it comes to debate or arguments do you strengthen or weaken your position by attacking the person instead of the subject/topic?

 

If you answer is that you strengthen your position by attacking the person then what do you base that upon?

 

If you answer you strengthen your position by attacking the position then why do you persist in continual attacks on forum members?

 


Originally Posted by INVICTUS:
Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
You talk a great deal but rarely get rid of an idea.

---------------------------------------------------

Wait Jemboy..The first tread you post in long time is grammatically

incorrect. My opinion is based on earth, wind and fire, can't

get any better.

.

What is a tread? Is that like that thing that wears out on tires?

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
I am not here to debate. It is pointless to have a rational argument with irrational people. I am also not here to tutor you on debating.

That is the definition of an atheist Bill.

"That is the definition of an atheist Bill." <--- That is the definition of a nitwit.

 

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
I am not here to debate. It is pointless to have a rational argument with irrational people. I am also not here to tutor you on debating.

That is the definition of an atheist Bill.

"That is the definition of an atheist Bill." <--- That is the definition of a nitwit.

 

--------------------------------------------------------

Jammaboy, with no respect at all, you're a complete waste of time

 

.

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
I am not here to debate. It is pointless to have a rational argument with irrational people. I am also not here to tutor you on debating.

That is the definition of an atheist Bill.

"That is the definition of an atheist Bill." <--- That is the definition of a nitwit.

 

LOL.  Owned yourself.  Think about it.

The level of Creationist stupidity here is just astounding.  There is a reason why not only other Americans, but foreigners as well, laugh at the naivete and ignorance of Southern Americans.

 

As any South American or European or Asian high schooler can tell you, evolution is a fact.  It is supported by mountains of evidence.  The desperate attempts of Creationists to deny it are laughable everywhere but the Bible Belt.

 

Those who laugh at Creationists are right.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY

 

LOL.

 

 

DF

Yes, Deep,

 

You declare, "Evolution is a fact!"   By this, of course, you mean Darwinian Evolution, i.e., macro evolution -- not adaptation, i.e., micro evolution.

 

And, when questioned about the validity of this statement -- what do we get?  "Because it is what I believe!!  And, it is what Charley Darwin wrote over 150 years ago.  So, it must be true!"

 

Duh!  Even Darwin stated that if scientist cannot find the "Missing Link" fossil -- Darwinian Evolution was breathing its last, rasping breath.  RIP Darwinian Evoltuion!

 

So, Deep, my Friend -- no matter how much you huff and puff, no matter how many signs your leader, Dawkins, puts on the side of buses -- Darwinian Evolution is dead,  Or as we uneducated Southerners, whom you love to demean, would say, "Old Charley's theory is ded -- D  E  D  -- ded!  So, we'uns might as well bury it with that old ded dawg out yonder!"

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

quote:    Originally Posted by (Deep) Not Shallow Not Slim:

Amazingly ignorant and ridiculous reply by Mr. Bill.   DF


Well, Deep, my Friend,

 

According to your posts, all Southerners, especially we who are fortunate enough to call Alabama our home state -- are ALL Bible thumping, ignorant, and uneducated.  So, I suppose your labels of "ignorant and ridiculous" would apply to all of our home state Friends -- at least, in your mind.

 

Personally, I am proud to tell folks I am an Alabamian.  I cannot think of any other place I would want to call home.  How about you?  Or, do you prefer Hollywood -- West Hollywood?

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

Amazingly ignorant and ridiculous reply by Mr. Bill.

 

DF

DF why do you think Bill’s reply was ignorant and ridiculous?

He has every right to call you out. Just because you and a group of old timey scientists want to keep hanging on to a theory long since proven to be wrong on most fronts doesn’t mean science has to stop and wait on you to catch up. Face modern facts Darwin evolution is a worn out argument based on fiction. There are no fossils that prove the theory. Get over it.

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

Magpie:

 

Would you please point me to one peer reviewed article that refutes "old timey scientists".  Thanks.

Seriously, why waste time pulling out articles for you just because you don’t keep up.

Bill just cited one such “old timey” scientist, Charley Darwin himself.

You can wish all you want to but there is no fossil evidence that points to mankind coming from apes.

You don’t have to believe in a creator but don’t invent something to simply make a nonbeliever look correct. That makes no sense, now does it?

It's okay, because I know that there are no peer reviewed articles that dispute evolution.  What you would post would be religious pseudo-scientists and other hacks.  Evolution is the basis for all biology, and is supported by numerous scientific fields, including paleontology, and geology.  If you want to believe hack pseudo-science proposed by ultra-right wing cultist wackos, that is okay with me, just don't bring into our schools.

quote:   Originally Posted by A. Robustus:

Notice how creationists always attack "Darwinian" evolution as if evolutionary sciences haven't advanced and surpassed Darwin's understanding in the last 200 years. Notice also how often creationists (if they ever reply to inquiries) don't even know what Evolution actually is.


Hi Robust,

 

Okay, I accept your challenge.  Please explain Darwinian Evolution for us.  I sincerely want to know what YOU believe Darwinian Evolution to be.   Notice the word believe -- as in a belief system, i.e., a religion.

 

I see the Evolution camp split into factions -- one which believes in Macro Evolution (Darwinian) -- a belief system which purports that one species evolved into a totally different species.  In other words, a fish became a dog, etc.

 

The other camp, in which I reside, sees Micro Evolution as being a form of adaptation, i.e., that plants, animals, fish, fowl, and humans have, over the millennia, adapted to environmental, dietary, and habitual conditions.   Each has changed in appearance due to the adaptation.   Skin colors adapt, body size and features adapt, etc. -- but, a human is still a human, an animal is still the same animal, a fish is still a fish, and a fowl is still a fowl.  No ape or monkey has become a human being.  No fish has become a chicken or a horse.   And, a plant is still a plant.  This adaptation is true Evolution which the Bible supports.

 

But, my Friend, I am truly interested in hearing YOUR explanation of Evolution.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

The scientific theory of biological evolution is the central organizing principle of life on earth. What we commonly call Evolution on this forum is a process that results in inheritable changes in a population of organisms (individual organisms don't evolve) via genetic material, over many generations. To biologists, the distinction between "macroevolution" and "microevolution" is utterly arbitrary. Macroevolution is just cumulative microevolution.

All species of organisms on earth have descended from a common ancestor. When scientists say that two species of apes, for example, such as humans and bonobos have evolved from a common ancestor, it means that there have been successive and inherited changes/modifications in those two populations since becoming genetically isolated from one another. To say that humans are related to bonobos does not mean that they are our ancestors or that humans evolved from bonobos. Our common human/bonobo ancestor, from which we evolved, is extinct. Every species living today is fully modern. No living species today is the ancestor to another living species.

Modern fish don't become chickens or horses, but since life evolved from the seas, today's chickens, horses and fish (and humans, giraffes, shrews, etc.) have a common and extinct ancestor that was a sea-dwelling vertebrate (like a fish) hundreds of millions of years ago. If any one reading this can't grasp this concept and how it's different from a fish becoming a horse then it's incumbent upon you to ask questions and/or do some research online or somewhere.

Darwin's research and conclusions were the beginning of our understanding and yet they have withstood heavy scientific scrutiny for over 150 years (...not 200 years) and they still manage to accommodate the latest modern findings. Nothing can top it. Why not? Because it's true. How do we know it's true? Because Darwin's central ideas have generated testable predictions that have been borne out by mountains evidence and discoveries accumulated over a wide spectrum of sciences for a very, very long time. And to this day, every new discovery and surprise finding in any of the life sciences supports and gives more validation to Darwin's theory, while continuing to extend our understanding of all life on earth.

As has been demonstrated on this forum so often, those who reject the scientific fact of Evolution always reference a severe misunderstanding (or purposeful misinformation) of what Evolution actually is. They can't deny something that is actually explainable, demonstrable and testable so instead they resort to illogical and unscientific straw-man caricatures to attack (and look ridiculous in the process).

"Is man an ape or an angel? I, my lord, I am on the side of the angels. I repudiate with indignation and abhorrence those newfangled theories." - Benjamin Disraeli, 1864 (or Bill Gray, 2011)

"...ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin, 1871

Bill,
What a surprise! Thanks for trying to respond. It's such a rarity for you not to run and hide. I was concerned that you thought that was normal. Anyway, after reading what you typed though, I was reminded why you should probably go back to the run and hide strategy.

Also, I'm purposely posting in this already new thread you created to get away from another thread instead of the new, new one you just created to get away from this one, because I know it'll no doubt warm that control-freak heart of yours

1. The scientific theory of biological evolution is the central organizing principle of life on earth. What we commonly call Evolution on this forum is a process that results in inheritable changes in a population of organisms (individual organisms don't evolve) via genetic material, over many generations. To biologists, the distinction between "macroevolution" and "microevolution" is utterly arbitrary. Macroevolution is just cumulative microevolution.
 
Even though you chose to try to address the above, there's absolutely nothing you said that makes any sense whatsoever. You shouldn't let buffalo write for you.

2. All species of organisms on earth have descended from a common ancestor. When scientists say that two species of apes, for example, such as humans and bonobos have evolved from a common ancestor, it means that there have been successive and inherited changes/modifications in those two populations since becoming genetically isolated from one another. To say that humans are related to bonobos does not mean that they are our ancestors or that humans evolved from bonobos. Our common human/bonobo ancestor, from which we evolved, is extinct. Every species living today is fully modern. No living species today is the ancestor to another living species.

Again, even though you attempt to approach the quote above, nothing you said remotely shows any understanding of this most simple of outlines. Plus none of your response is directly related to the explanation above. You even manage to trip up on the interpretation of the definitions you try to use.

3. Modern fish don't become chickens or horses, but since life evolved from the seas, today's chickens, horses and fish (and humans, giraffes, shrews, etc.) have a common and extinct ancestor that was a sea-dwelling vertebrate (like a fish) hundreds of millions of years ago. If any one reading this can't grasp this concept and how it's different from a fish becoming a horse then it's incumbent upon you to ask questions and/or do some research online or somewhere.

Again, no direct response to the above at all, just another evasion and circumvention while showing an utter lack of comprehension of the topic at hand, even though it's simply written and explained at your own request.

 

[brb]

4. Darwin's research and conclusions were the beginning of our understanding and yet they have withstood heavy scientific scrutiny for over 150 years (...not 200 years) and they still manage to accommodate the latest modern findings. Nothing can top it. Why not? Because it's true. How do we know it's true? Because Darwin's central ideas have generated testable predictions that have been borne out by mountains evidence and discoveries accumulated over a wide spectrum of sciences for a very, very long time. And to this day, every new discovery and surprise finding in any of the life sciences supports and gives more validation to Darwin's theory, while continuing to extend our understanding of all life on earth.

In "response" to the above you pull out the vanquished 'no transitional fossils' canard. All I can really say is that you are either horribly ignorant, horribly misinformed or just plain lying (or maybe a combination of two or more). You should know for the future that as poor as the known fossil record was at the time of The Origin Of Species, this claim was legit for exactly ONLY two years after publication. The discovery of Archaeopteryx lithographica in 1861 alone (I think 9 other Archeopteryx have been discovered since) put the question about fossilized proof of common descent to bed. Othniel Charles Marsh's book on the evolution of horses in 1874 is another early example of the studies of transitional fossils. Bill, your window to question transitional fossils closed exactly 150 years ago. Please note that since this is not still 1859 (not for the rest of us anyway) that common descent or Evolution doesn't rest on fossil evidence alone. Genetics, geology, developmental biology, paleoanthropology, biogeography, etc, etc. provide ample and robust evidence for Evolution and common ancestors.

Here's some reading material since you have a lot to learn on the subject before ever uttering the words "transitional fossils" again. Please do us all a favor and familiarize yourself with these and more:

Taxonomy, Transitional Forms, and the Fossil Record by Keith B. Miller
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Miller.html

Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ by Kathleen Hunt
(a partial list of known transitions from the vertebrate fossil record. Concentrating exclusively on groups that left living descendants & ignoring the hundreds of other groups and side-branches that died out. Also skipping entire groups of vertebrates [most notably the dinosaurs and modern fish] in order to emphasize mammals)

PART 1 has FISHES to FIRST MAMMALS & BIRDS:
Transitions from primitive fish to sharks, skates, rays
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part1a.html#fish
Transitions from primitive fish to bony fish
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part1a.html#bony
Transition from fishes to first amphibians
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...al/part1a.html#amph1
Transitions among amphibians
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...al/part1a.html#amph2
Transition from amphibians to first reptiles
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...al/part1b.html#rept1
Transitions among reptiles
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...al/part1b.html#rept2
Transition from reptiles to first mammals (long)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part1b.html#mamm
Transition from reptiles to first birds
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part1b.html#bird

PART 2 has TRANSITIONS AMONG MAMMALS:
Primates
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq.../part2a.html#primate
Bats
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...onal/part2a.html#bat
Carnivores
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part2a.html#carn
Rodents
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...onal/part2a.html#rod
Lagomorphs (rabbits & hares)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...onal/part2b.html#lag
Condylarths (first hoofed animals)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part2b.html#cond
Cetaceans (whales & dolphins)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part2b.html#ceta
Perissodactyls (horses, rhinos, tapirs)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part2b.html#peri
Elephants
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...al/part2b.html#eleph
Sirenians (dugongs & manatees)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...al/part2b.html#siren
Artiodactyls (pigs, hippos, deer, giraffes, cows, etc.)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part2c.html#arti
Species transitions from other miscellaneous mammal groups
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nal/part2c.html#misc

and lastly...

5. As has been demonstrated on this forum so often, those who reject the scientific fact of Evolution always reference a severe misunderstanding (or purposeful misinformation) of what Evolution actually is. They can't deny something that is actually explainable, demonstrable and testable so instead they resort to illogical and unscientific straw-man caricatures to attack (and look ridiculous in the process).

In response to the above you predictably do the only thing you can do, which is to do exactly the thing I said you would do you ignore the existence of an abundance of transitional fossils from all over the world (and all the non-fossil evidence from every other type of life science) and then boldly claim that your lie, alone, falsifies all of Evolution... just pitiful. tisk tisk.

Bill, this is a topic in which you have absolutely no chance. Don't think that the others can't see it. You've unwittingly challenged an aircraft carrier and managed only to bring a paper boat to the contest. I suggest sticking to making Christians angry instead, which is your true gift to atheists. Thanks for playing my game!!!

Rob, all these links I have visited to be fair to your argument.

The only way these links can be credible to the argument is by the semantics of them.

They are not evidence of Darwin evolution from common ancestor but simply to a false idea.

As a scientist I cannot assume gaps are filled when they certainly are not. You on the other hand have an idea that everything at one time started with life-form with serial #1. That idea is real only through semantics and does not require gap evidence.

Semantics are classical in nature. We have long since left the classical world in our investigations and the new quantum world will never be unified with the classical world wherein lieth the Cause.

Originally Posted by Magpie:

Rob, all these links I have visited to be fair to your argument.

The only way these links can be credible to the argument is by the semantics of them.

They are not evidence of Darwin evolution from common ancestor but simply to a false idea.

As a scientist I cannot assume gaps are filled when they certainly are not. You on the other hand have an idea that everything at one time started with life-form with serial #1. That idea is real only through semantics and does not require gap evidence.

Semantics are classical in nature. We have long since left the classical world in our investigations and the new quantum world will never be unified with  classical world wherein lieth the Cause.

You claim to be a scientist? Really? Could you please translate the second and last two sentences into English?

 

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by Magpie:

Rob, all these links I have visited to be fair to your argument.

The only way these links can be credible to the argument is by the semantics of them.

They are not evidence of Darwin evolution from common ancestor but simply to a false idea.

As a scientist I cannot assume gaps are filled when they certainly are not. You on the other hand have an idea that everything at one time started with life-form with serial #1. That idea is real only through semantics and does not require gap evidence.

Semantics are classical in nature. We have long since left the classical world in our investigations and the new quantum world will never be unified with  classical world wherein lieth the Cause.

You claim to be a scientist? Really? Could you please translate the second and last two sentences into English?

 

========================

Jimbo dear go here, read and come back if you don’t understand any idiot can use the word transitional.

 

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nsitional/email.html

Classical refers to what we see and touch that is explained by Newtonian physics.

The quantum world is not explained by Newtonian laws of physics. That’s what relativity is all about jimi the unified approach by Einstein to explain a quantum world he had doubts about. The mass of elementary particles [semantics] is unexplained. The LHC is looking for what else other than quarks and gluons are for instance inside the bound state of a proton. [ bound state means it has not been busted open letting the quarks and gluons escape to the outside where they don’t exist once they are outside. Now that’s

weird too]] Semantics give the idea that they are point particles. Are they? Could be. They behave like waves and particles when they actually are neither. They only have properties of waves and particles. The Graviton must be looked at by semantics. What is it/ a particle? A property of it is it’s effect is infinite or is there even such a thing as gravitational force. Current theories is that it is a constant falling into curved space-time and not a force. Gravity as a force does not explain how time slows near any object of mass. Semantics allow us to imagine the quantum world as li’l balls in orbit around one another. Well semantically they do just that. We even accelerate them head-on into one another and semantically explain the results as in billiards. Not the case. That’s classical, Newtonian. In the quantum world we do not know the classical position and momentum of a particle [semantics]. We use the term momentum referred to as mass times velocity. Semantics again. It is the time element and the energy since mass and energy are the same thing. [ E=mc^2]These classical behaviors ,when applied on a quantum level require the theories of relativity to NOT explain them as it turns out. Now that’s weird.

Originally Posted by Magpie:
Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Originally Posted by Magpie:

Rob, all these links I have visited to be fair to your argument.

The only way these links can be credible to the argument is by the semantics of them.

They are not evidence of Darwin evolution from common ancestor but simply to a false idea.

As a scientist I cannot assume gaps are filled when they certainly are not. You on the other hand have an idea that everything at one time started with life-form with serial #1. That idea is real only through semantics and does not require gap evidence.

Semantics are classical in nature. We have long since left the classical world in our investigations and the new quantum world will never be unified with  classical world wherein lieth the Cause.

You claim to be a scientist? Really? Could you please translate the second and last two sentences into English?

 

========================

Jimbo dear go here, read and come back if you don’t understand any idiot can use the word transitional.

 

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...nsitional/email.html

Classical refers to what we see and touch that is explained by Newtonian physics.

The quantum world is not explained by Newtonian laws of physics. That’s what relativity is all about jimi the unified approach by Einstein to explain a quantum world he had doubts about. The mass of elementary particles [semantics] is unexplained. The LHC is looking for what else other than quarks and gluons are for instance inside the bound state of a proton. [ bound state means it has not been busted open letting the quarks and gluons escape to the outside where they don’t exist once they are outside. Now that’s

weird too]] Semantics give the idea that they are point particles. Are they? Could be. They behave like waves and particles when they actually are neither. They only have properties of waves and particles. The Graviton must be looked at by semantics. What is it/ a particle? A property of it is it’s effect is infinite or is there even such a thing as gravitational force. Current theories is that it is a constant falling into curved space-time and not a force. Gravity as a force does not explain how time slows near any object of mass. Semantics allow us to imagine the quantum world as li’l balls in orbit around one another. Well semantically they do just that. We even accelerate them head-on into one another and semantically explain the results as in billiards. Not the case. That’s classical, Newtonian. In the quantum world we do not know the classical position and momentum of a particle [semantics]. We use the term momentum referred to as mass times velocity. Semantics again. It is the time element and the energy since mass and energy are the same thing. [ E=mc^2]These classical behaviors ,when applied on a quantum level require the theories of relativity to NOT explain them as it turns out. Now that’s weird.

Why is "transitional" relevant?  "Lieth"? Did you just climb out of a time machine? Einstein would be shocked to learn that mass and energy are the "same thing". What is weird is that you rally believe that you know what you are babbling about.

The equivalence is described by the famous equation:

<dl><dd>E = mc^2 \,\!</dd></dl>

where E is energy, m is mass, and c is the speed of light in a vacuum. The formula is dimensionally consistent and does not depend on any specific system of measurement units. For example, in many systems of natural units, the speed (scalar) of light is set equal to 1, and the formula becomes the identity E = m; hence the term "mass–energy equivalence".[ [Wiki]

 

Dummy. LOL

Originally Posted by JimiHendrix:
Cut and paste isn't equal to understanding. LOL


==================

True jimbo very true but if I cut and paste anything rest assured I understand it.

Did you understand from the cut and paste what an idiot you are?….or did you Not understand from the cut and paste what an idiot you are?……….or will you make another post about science re-enforcing your own claim to be an idiot?…………or will you simply remain silent contemplating your role here on the forum as the self proclaimed village idiot?

While I have advised many of my fellow Christian participants that I am trying to voluntarily remove myself from the Religion Forum as basically nothing changes and there is no sense in wasting time redoing the same thing over and over I do reserve the option to respond from time to time either to explain or clarify a position I hold.  In this case my response is to A Rob's post regarding evolution.  I have stated before that my opposition to evolution is based more in evolution's glaring absences and defeciences than in my Religious beliefs.  There are examples of Religious people who believe Evolution is the vehicle of life from a singular common organism.  Since it's considered so stupid to ignore scientific "facts" as they are referred to here lets go on the assumption that A Rob's post is 100% accurate in the way transitions happen.  My opposition still remains valid based upon the following:

 

First of all we live on an Earth that is beneficial to and reinforces the development of life.  If all life evolved from this primordial pool of organisms and evolution is an unintelligent, unguided process, then the exact same processes and transitions should be occurring, across the board and scope of life, today just as they did eon's ago.  We have the base organism's (most simplistic) as well as an environment that fosters life and growth, so since evolution is an unguided and unintelligent process it should be assumed and expected that the same process replicates itself over and over as long as there is sufficient reinforcement for life to continue.  The hypothesis of all the various species of life from most basic to however complex should be an existing and present road map for all to follow and examine.  Instead what we are expected to believe is that the map is there in extinct fossils many of which are jumps in time, and we are expected to just accept that they all fit together.  Evolution in and of itself (being an unintelligent process) decided that various stages of completion had occurred so therefore replication of those transitions no longer needed to occur even though the base elements were still there and the environment that could foster their growth was still present.

 

A Rob you presented a quite detailed list of transitionary steps but all stages of life and transitions from single to complex species of all the various life forms (plant, bacteria, mammal, amphibian, bird etc)  each of it's own but missing is the interspecies and extra-species transitions still happening today as it did eon's ago in time.   If Evolution is a non-directed and non-intelligent process then there can be no way to know transitions have occurred and therefore can stop as you still have the most base organisms who long to be more complex and thrive in life.  It is this missing evidence that I believe most glaring speaks to evolution's inadequacies at explaining life.  

 

What Evolution does do though is provide anyone that seeks to explain life as an unintelligent accident without direction a process by which they can cling to in order to attempt to explain how we became who we are without a God or deity to direct it.   Evolution is a process that Science can test and examine therefore is accepted without reservation by those who cannot conceive of, or envision, a realm apart from the physical realm that we are a part of.  A realm or source where life could have originated from which is beyond the ability of science or any other physical process to test or explain.  It is the acceptance of the possibility, also, that the source and process of life and life forms come from a process which is beyond human comprehension and understanding.

 

If you are going to defend Evolution then please explain how some non-intelligent and non-directed process determines that transitions have occurred and therefore can cease or are no longer valid and necessary to continue on?  How is it that we can find the base organisms and single celled entities and have the, to date, finished products yet somehow the process roadmap or schematics of life has to be constructed from fossils of long past entities that were once a part of the process and now are no longer necessary or present?  I believe that Evolution is it's own worst enemy once one starts asking critical questions about the process and attempting to piece together development of cross species transitions.     This is but one of the problems I have with evolution as an explanation for how lIfe became and developed.

Originally Posted by gbrk:

  My opposition still remains valid based upon the following:

 

First of all we live on an Earth that is beneficial to and reinforces the development of life.  If all life evolved from this primordial pool of organisms and evolution is an unintelligent, unguided process, then the exact same processes and transitions should be occurring, across the board and scope of life, today just as they did eon's ago. 

__________

This assumes that nothing else changes, ever.  And that is simply not the case.  Conditions on Earth now are far different than when life first formed, were different before life first formed, and have undergone vast changes since then.

 

Since your base assumption is fallacious, whatever else you wrote won't stand up.

Although yes things in many places have changed there are places, enough places, still as they were that my objection holds valid.  There are places in the Rain Forrest where they are still finding and classifying new species.  They have even, not too long ago, found a new tribe of humans just discovered.  Then you have the sea floor where most of the area of this earth resides and that has not changed that much.  In fact there are many more life forms there than above the oceans If what the Science Channel can be trusted.  No if evolution is valid there should be ample living, existing evidence to verify it as fact and not theory.
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by gbrk:

  My opposition still remains valid based upon the following:

 

First of all we live on an Earth that is beneficial to and reinforces the development of life.  If all life evolved from this primordial pool of organisms and evolution is an unintelligent, unguided process, then the exact same processes and transitions should be occurring, across the board and scope of life, today just as they did eon's ago. 

__________

This assumes that nothing else changes, ever.  And that is simply not the case.  Conditions on Earth now are far different than when life first formed, were different before life first formed, and have undergone vast changes since then.

 

Since your base assumption is fallacious, whatever else you wrote won't stand up.

=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=

Crusty, you are assuming yourself that things have changed.

You don’t know that to be the case now do you?

That’s the very reason I suggest you need to be comfortable with the 6k package w/instructions.

Originally Posted by gbrk:

While I have advised many of my fellow Christian participants that I am trying to voluntarily remove myself from the Religion Forum as basically nothing changes and there is no sense in wasting time redoing the same thing over and over I do reserve the option to respond from time to time either to explain or clarify a position I hold.  In this case my response is to A Rob's post regarding evolution.  I have stated before that my opposition to evolution is based more in evolution's glaring absences and defeciences than in my Religious beliefs.  There are examples of Religious people who believe Evolution is the vehicle of life from a singular common organism.  Since it's considered so stupid to ignore scientific "facts" as they are referred to here lets go on the assumption that A Rob's post is 100% accurate in the way transitions happen.  My opposition still remains valid based upon the following:

 

First of all we live on an Earth that is beneficial to and reinforces the development of life.  If all life evolved from this primordial pool of organisms and evolution is an unintelligent, unguided process, then the exact same processes and transitions should be occurring, across the board and scope of life, today just as they did eon's ago.  We have the base organism's (most simplistic) as well as an environment that fosters life and growth, so since evolution is an unguided and unintelligent process it should be assumed and expected that the same process replicates itself over and over as long as there is sufficient reinforcement for life to continue.  The hypothesis of all the various species of life from most basic to however complex should be an existing and present road map for all to follow and examine.  Instead what we are expected to believe is that the map is there in extinct fossils many of which are jumps in time, and we are expected to just accept that they all fit together.  Evolution in and of itself (being an unintelligent process) decided that various stages of completion had occurred so therefore replication of those transitions no longer needed to occur even though the base elements were still there and the environment that could foster their growth was still present.

 

A Rob you presented a quite detailed list of transitionary steps but all stages of life and transitions from single to complex species of all the various life forms (plant, bacteria, mammal, amphibian, bird etc)  each of it's own but missing is the interspecies and extra-species transitions still happening today as it did eon's ago in time.   If Evolution is a non-directed and non-intelligent process then there can be no way to know transitions have occurred and therefore can stop as you still have the most base organisms who long to be more complex and thrive in life.  It is this missing evidence that I believe most glaring speaks to evolution's inadequacies at explaining life.  

 

What Evolution does do though is provide anyone that seeks to explain life as an unintelligent accident without direction a process by which they can cling to in order to attempt to explain how we became who we are without a God or deity to direct it.   Evolution is a process that Science can test and examine therefore is accepted without reservation by those who cannot conceive of, or envision, a realm apart from the physical realm that we are a part of.  A realm or source where life could have originated from which is beyond the ability of science or any other physical process to test or explain.  It is the acceptance of the possibility, also, that the source and process of life and life forms come from a process which is beyond human comprehension and understanding.

 

If you are going to defend Evolution then please explain how some non-intelligent and non-directed process determines that transitions have occurred and therefore can cease or are no longer valid and necessary to continue on?  How is it that we can find the base organisms and single celled entities and have the, to date, finished products yet somehow the process roadmap or schematics of life has to be constructed from fossils of long past entities that were once a part of the process and now are no longer necessary or present?  I believe that Evolution is it's own worst enemy once one starts asking critical questions about the process and attempting to piece together development of cross species transitions.     This is but one of the problems I have with evolution as an explanation for how lIfe became and developed.

Reading any modern biology book, something that you, obviously, have not done, will answer all of your questions. Evolution by natural selection is established scientific fact, and there is nothing that you can do about it other than foolishly deny it.

Originally Posted by Magpie:
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

Amazingly ignorant and ridiculous reply by Mr. Bill.

 

DF

DF why do you think Bill’s reply was ignorant and ridiculous?

He has every right to call you out. Just because you and a group of old timey scientists want to keep hanging on to a theory long since proven to be wrong on most fronts doesn’t mean science has to stop and wait on you to catch up. Face modern facts Darwin evolution is a worn out argument based on fiction. There are no fossils that prove the theory. Get over it.

Maggie,

 

Did you read Bill's comment?  Here it is, again, for your edification.

 


Yes, Deep,

 

You declare, "Evolution is a fact!"   By this, of course, you mean Darwinian Evolution, i.e., macro evolution -- not adaptation, i.e., micro evolution.

 

And, when questioned about the validity of this statement -- what do we get?  "Because it is what I believe!!  And, it is what Charley Darwin wrote over 150 years ago.  So, it must be true!"

 

Duh!  Even Darwin stated that if scientist cannot find the "Missing Link" fossil -- Darwinian Evolution was breathing its last, rasping breath.  RIP Darwinian Evoltuion!

 

So, Deep, my Friend -- no matter how much you huff and puff, no matter how many signs your leader, Dawkins, puts on the side of buses -- Darwinian Evolution is dead,  Or as we uneducated Southerners, whom you love to demean, would say, "Old Charley's theory is ded -- D  E  D  -- ded!  So, we'uns might as well bury it with that old ded dawg out yonder!"

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

 

------------------------------------------

 

Bill is deliberately ignorant, or dishonest, choose one, on the issue of evolution.  All evolution is "micro" evolution.  Dogs don't give birth to cats.

 

Then he says I'm dogmatic about evolution.  I am not.  If a better theory comes along to explain biodiversity, I'm all ears.  So far, none has, and evolution has been demonstrated and proven countless times.  Bill can only understand dogma.  It's not a competition of dogmas, it's reason and science against superstition.

 

Creationists use the "missing link" red herring to a toxic level.  Every time an intermediate form is demonstrated, it creates two more "missing links".  This level of thinking and exposure to science was outdated over 100 years ago.  It's silly, and puerile.

 

Now, Bill is almost close to a significant point when he says that Darwin is dead.  He really is.  Gone for years.  And Darwin knew nothing about genetics, DNA, random mutations thereof, but his theory of Natural Selection was spot-on.  He surmised, correctly, that for whatever reason, species experienced random changes, and that some of them were beneficial, most of them were not.  It was the beginning of an extraordinary scientific leap in knowledge, one that benefits the world immeasurably every day in the fields of medicine, agriculture, and ranching, to name but a few.  Someone had to notice the way things are, and that person was Darwin.  Darwin was right.

 

Now, my dear Maggie, we both know Bill is beyond help.  He is terminally afflicted with religious poisoning.  Are you so afflicted?  Are you so bound up in your dogmatic, religious, superstitious explanation of life that you cannot see the natural truth?  I say this as a person who has an understanding of that point of view, and has rejected it in the light of knowledge and reason.

 

Bill is lost.  Are you?  The truth of evolution will persevere because of its merits, and it does not need Bill's nor your permission.  The dogma of Creationism will eventually fail, as surely as Zeus and Mithra no longer hold sway, and for the same reason.

 

Now, let's discuss your post.  You accuse evolutionary biologists of being "old timey" scientists?  First, there is nothing more "old timey" than a religious explanation for nature.  Second, evolution is a demonstrable fact, in the fossil records and in the genetic record.  Please, please expose yourself to the current state of the art of science before you embarrass yourself further.  If you honestly want some exposure to science, PM me.  I can direct you to information that you will find interesting, if challenging.

 

My dear Maggie, the Bible does not explain the world.  It is a story book written by ancient Jews and Greeks who know nothing about Nature.  It was influenced by even more ancient cultures such as the Babylonians and Egyptians, and they knew squat about nature.  The Bible is demonstrably wrong in great consistency.

 

Bill has gone over the edge in his religious lunacy.  Shall you, as well?  Do you have the courage to accept my challenge and review some basic reason and science?

 

Christianity is essentially flawed.  It's basic premise is flawed.  PM me and ask me what I mean.

 

Hoping to hear from you in earnest academic fashion,

 

DF

gbrk,
Your replies are often evidence for what doesn't happen to a person when presented with explanations about the world while wearing religious blinders. A lot of what you asked, supposed and misunderstood were already answered, rejected and explained before you decided to type another dragging post. Before your next post you should appreciate that you have a profound lack of understanding about even the basics of Evolution (or science or history for that matter, as demonstrated by your posts in response to this and other non-theistic subjects). I believe your narrow religious viewpoint is to blame for what you still don't know as an adult. The information is readily available to remedy that, but you have to be curious enough to learn. Your proud opposition to Evolution is just based on the glaring gaps in your own knowledge. If you were well-informed, at least you could make an educated assessment of these things in response, but you're not there yet.

 

As I said before, Evolution is predictive, explainable, testable and verifiable. Nothing else exists as a complete explanation of how the biological world works. Nothing. If you disagree, please tell me the predictions "Intelligent Design" makes, the explanations it provides and show me how they can be tested and verified.

 

If you can't do that, at least show me how ID has helped to defeat deadly diseases or maybe list some other life-saving medical advances that it's responsible for. Our scientific understanding of Evolution has made these things and more possible. How has ID contributed in the real world?

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×