It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in evolution debate

There are 141328 comments on the Asheville Citizen-Times story from Mar 15, 2009, titled It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in evolution debate. In it, Asheville Citizen-Times reports that:

I would like to respond to the letter 'Recent letter offered no examples of Darwinian disingenuousness,' . He responds to an article with, 'He says evolution is 'so riddled with holes,' yet fails to provide a ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Asheville Citizen-Times.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112609 Mar 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
From one of your recent master lists,
"The Greek word “en” meaning “in” is paraphrased as “in union with” to support the Watchtower teaching that Christians support the cause of Christ, but do not have Christ dwelling within them.
Matthew 10:32 (twice)"
Nothing in KJV about Christ dwelling within Christians there.

What are you talking about?

No data, no dice. that means a reference and/or a link.

Thanks for more nothing.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#112610 Mar 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Verse 28 does not name who carved the Ten Commandments on the tablets.

This is your defense.

Verse 27 does. Unless god lied or Moses refused.

dipstick.
LowellGuy

United States

#112611 Mar 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I do hold to the rules of logic and invite you to prove otherwise.
You accept everything in the Bible as true based on some ambiguous subjective standard, while the rules of logic and reason we hold ourselves to do not recognize that as a valid means of determining which claims should be accepted and which shouldn't. We don't recognize the source of a claim as sufficient evidence for accepting claims that defy the known laws of physics and genetics because the rules of logic and reason prohibit that, but you do.

No matter how many times you claim otherwise, you are using a wholly different and generally useless set of rules regarding logic and reason than we are. Disagree? Then you must give up your "Bible is a demonstrated reliable source" nonsense. Because you thinking you're right about your religion is more important to you than reality is, you will not do this. Surprise me.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#112612 Mar 21, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Marcus Borg, Consulting Editor, "The Lost Gospel Q: The Original Sayings of Jesus",Ulysses Press, Berkeley CA (1996), P. 15 & 28
Burton L. Mack, "The Lost Gospel of Q: The Book of Christian Origins", Harper, San Francisco,(1993)
Burton L. Mack, "Who Wrote the New Testament?", Harper Collins, San Francisco,(1995)
Robert J. Miller, Ed., "The Complete Gospels", Polebridge Press, Sonoma CA,(1992), P. 249-300.
F.V. Filson, "The Literary Relations among the Gospels," essay in
C.M. Laymon: "The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary on the Bible," Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN,(1991)
"The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary on the Bible," Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN,(1991)
Rev. C.I. Schofield, "The Schofield Reference Bible," Oxford University Press, New York, NY
H.H. Halley, "Halley's Bible Handbook," Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI,(1965)
H.L. Wilmington, "Wilmington's Bible Handbook," Tyndale, Wheaton, IL,(1997)
P.N. Benware, "Survey of the New Testament," Moody Press, Chicago, IL,(1990)
J.D. Douglas, Gen. Ed., "New Commentary on the Whole Bible," Tyndale, Wheaton, IL,(1990)
L.P. Pherigo, "The Gospel According to Mark," essay in C.M. Laymon: "The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary on the Bible," Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN,(1991), P. 644
R. Shorto, "Gospel Truth," Riverhead Books, New York, NY,(1997)
R.W. Funk, et al., "The Parables of Jesus," Polebridge Press (1988) Page xvii.
R.J. Miller, op cit., P. 402-405
All I need is one item of data confirming who wrote a gospel.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#112613 Mar 21, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
More terms NOT found in the Bible:
"The Fall"
"Original Sin"
I agree.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#112614 Mar 21, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you only CLAIM to refer to the oldest manuscripts and original languages.
You are so dumb you thing the NWT uses said manuscripts and translations. You are to chicken to even investigate the fraud.
I investigate the NWT continually. That's how I know it uses the ancient manuscripts and translations. It appears to be you who is aftraid to investigate. You just accept the summary statements of others (Galatians 6:5).

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#112615 Mar 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Verse 28 does not name who carved the Ten Commandments on the tablets.
But verse 27 does.'27 Then the Lord said to Moses,“Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.”'

At the start God said " and I will write on them the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke.(@sshole)"

I guess after all of that talking he was tired and decided to have Moses do it.

At any rate, I don't care. The Tenth Commandment is still a ban on cheeseburgers.

That is a pretty potent sin. So bad it had to be one of the actual ten carved in stone. Not the first ten of hundreds that god spoke to the nation of Israel.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#112616 Mar 21, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This is your defense.
Verse 27 does. Unless god lied or Moses refused.
dipstick.
Rats, you saw it too. But you got it four hours earlier. Of course I was gone at that time.

Good job.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#112617 Mar 21, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
What are you talking about?
No data, no dice. that means a reference and/or a link.
Thanks for more nothing.
I gave you a reference. In fact, you gave you a reference, Mt. 10:32, but apparently you didn't check it yourself. This might work better for you if you choose the next point.
KAB

Oxford, NC

#112618 Mar 21, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This is your defense.
Verse 27 does. Unless god lied or Moses refused.
dipstick.
Ex. 34:27
"And Jehovah went on to say to Moses:“Write down for yourself these words, because it is in accordance with these words that I do conclude a covenant with you and Israel.”

Verse 28 states, "... And he (that would be YHWH; see Deut. 4:13) proceeded to write upon the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Words."

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#112619 Mar 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Ex. 34:27
"And Jehovah went on to say to Moses:“Write down for yourself these words, because it is in accordance with these words that I do conclude a covenant with you and Israel.”
Verse 28 states, "... And he (that would be YHWH; see Deut. 4:13) proceeded to write upon the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Words."
What a maroon. Now he has forgotten the start of the chapter.

Sheez, no wonder he believes that Noah's Ark garbage.
LowellGuy

Lowell, MA

#112620 Mar 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
All I need is one item of data confirming who wrote a gospel.
All I need is one item of data confirming the existence of unicorns.
LowellGuy

Lowell, MA

#112621 Mar 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
It isn't.
So, the layngeal nerve in the giraffe is a poor bit of engineering. Thanks for agreeing, though it took way too long to get you to admit it. You recognize the error in such a design (if it were designed), and since evolution is merely about altering existing structures and "good enough" rather than what's optimal, evolution explains the giraffe's laryngeal nerve better than "God did it." You resist answering questions directly for exactly this reason. When you do, it can only ever lead to you contradicting your religious apologetics. Welcome to logic. As I've warned you before, logic is not your friend.

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#112622 Mar 21, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
All I need is one item of data confirming the existence of unicorns.
Or Moses

“Darwin was right..of course.”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Evolution is true.....

#112623 Mar 21, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
All I need is one item of data confirming who wrote a gospel.
They are known to be anonymous by scholars.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112624 Mar 22, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I have consistently referred to oldest manuscripts and original languages in resolving questions/challenges, haven't I? You are among those constantly referring to English versions to try to make your points, aren't you?
Yes, you've been quite successful with that diversionary tactic - if clouding the already stagnant waters that is what you wish to call "resolving questions/challenges". The plain English is that the Bible in its earliest form was no more substantial or accurate than it is with the NWT refinements.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112625 Mar 22, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I do hold to the rules of logic and invite you to prove otherwise.
What "rules of logic" pretend that mythology is fact until proven false, then ignores evidence which confirms that mythology is false, then flat out lies about even that??
MIND YOUR 9TH COMMANDMENT, KAB.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#112626 Mar 22, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, since it states in the book that they were not, there you go.
Show me!

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#112627 Mar 22, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I investigate the NWT continually. That's how I know it uses the ancient manuscripts and translations. It appears to be you who is aftraid to investigate. You just accept the summary statements of others (Galatians 6:5).
Reading the Fredrick Franz Bible and other GB approved propaganda is not the same thing as "investigate."
I understand that you aren't allowed to, but have you ever read "Crisis of Conscience," KAB?

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#112628 Mar 22, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So then you're saying ALL science is fake.
No, as usual you are coming to an idiotic conclusion based on your inability to argue the point.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 55 min Subduction Zone 163,764
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) 8 hr Chimney1 1,871
How can we prove God exists, or does not? Sat Kong_ 80
News British Ban Teaching Creationism As Science, Sh... (Jul '14) Sat Swedenforever 159
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) May 19 Kathleen 19,031
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) May 18 SoE 178,597
Science News NOT related to evolution (Jul '09) May 15 emrenil 1,243
More from around the web