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

Full story: Asheville Citizen-Times

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 ...
Comments
110,541 - 110,560 of 135,622 Comments Last updated 6 hrs ago

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#112611
Mar 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

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

Oxford, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#112618
Mar 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

McMurdo Station

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

McMurdo Station

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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.

Level 1

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#112629
Mar 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Libertarian wrote:
We are surrounded by evolution in action. How would you explain how man managed to use to it to breed the domesticated animals he has?
That is micro, and no one is arguing about that.
Libertarian wrote:
Anyone who asks why apes are still around is just showing a complete lack of understanding of evolution. We came from a common ancestor.
Then please provide where this has been observed, tested, and replicated, which is demanded by the scientific method for a valid theory. I bet you can't!
Libertarian wrote:
If you don't believe in evoltion I suggest you never ever visit your doctor again as that is what all his knowledge and skill assumes. So you can't trust his knowledge.
Every doctor and scientist I know are creationists and reject Darwinism. Kindda blows your biases, huh?
Libertarian wrote:
Maybe that will lead the the non-believers into becoming victims of evolution themselves.
You don't even understand your own philosophy.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••