Evolution vs. Creation

[thewordofme]

CBOW wrote:

<quoted text>"honest answer any human can" that's it in a nutshell. You are only human, how could you prove or disprove God. He's way beyond any of our comprehension. Even your all mighty science CANNOT disprove God, try as you might.

But we CAN disprove things in the Bible which is supposed to be 'God breathed' and therefore inerrant.

A number of things have already been disproved in that 'holy book'.

[MAAT]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> Then tell me how did the universe came into form? i will keep on asking you all, until then!

The silly thing is that you do not even read back as to the answers. It's not as if ou are keeping a list and put a tick down.
Since all of us have allready anwered that in varios froms and complexity.

But that is not what it is about.
What it was about is the distinction between knowledge and believe.
That a fact can be falsified but a believe per definition not.

And it's about f.i. Nostre Aetate interfaith relations and it's foolow-up where the pope writes about the new theology and that relations with muslims have greatly improved, for they graciously offerered their deserts to receive all the dead on judgement day.

That is sofar out...that it is borderline psychotic.
A totally empty gesture in real-world terms, accepted as real.

[MAAT]

macumazahn wrote:

<quoted text>I have a hand-raised cockatiel.
Thinks she owns the place.

She does. ;] You are just there for the conveniences.

[MAAT]

macumazahn wrote:

<quoted text>"String theory"? No need of that there.
I was talking bog-standard astrophysics.

Aye lol.
The rest is for sparetime.

[MAAT]

thewordofme wrote:

<quoted text>
But we CAN disprove things in the Bible which is supposed to be 'God breathed' and therefore inerrant.
A number of things have already been disproved in that 'holy book'.

I always have to split up since the christian version differs notably from the hebrew one in interpretation.
And then i'm not even talking archeological fiction and fact.
According to Eusebius who ordered the bible written the world AA anno adam was a 2323 (if i recal correctly) years old in the year 108 CE.

[MAAT]

Kong_ wrote:

<quoted text>
Uh....people made those up too.
( Am I really trying to converse with this nitwit?)

Your occasional presence sofar gave me the illusion that i was doing something sensible. lol.

Shattered.

[macumazahn]

woodtick57 wrote:

yikes! a cnn anchor asks if the near miss asteroid coming our way is an effect of global warming...
are people seriously this stupid? how can they feed themselves?
http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2tIyg0/:1kOOJZP...

Yah, I heard about that.

I think the silly bint thought that "meteor" had something to do with "meteorology".

Enough to make one's eyes cross.

[woodtick57]

macumazahn wrote:

<quoted text>I have a hand-raised cockatiel.
Thinks she owns the place.

i have issues with birds being caged...kind of like putting dolphins and whales in little goldfish bowls like seaworld or various zoos...

[macumazahn]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow ... um ... wow. No, the simplest answer is often the correct one, and the simplest answer is that the chemical reactions are simply there, when you add in some "creator" you complicate it, a lot, a massive amount, you make it so complex that you cannot stay in the realm of reality even when you contemplate it because it doesn't fit any of the evidence at all. Just because something exists, doesn't mean it was "created."

Hi, Kit.

Cool pic!

[macumazahn]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> The same Blah blah blah blah blah. Tell me if you have one single shred of evidence, how the universe came into form?

I can't speak for Thomas, but it beats the heck outta me.

So far.

Are you under the impression that your ignorance of science is somehow evidence of your deity?

[macumazahn]

MAAT wrote:

<quoted text>
She does. ;] You are just there for the conveniences.

Yer not wrong...

Laffin.

[Kong_]

MAAT wrote:

<quoted text>Your occasional presence sofar gave me the illusion that i was doing something sensible. lol.

Shattered.

Actually, you have done very well.

It's dealing with someone with the intellect of a houseplant (or a POE) that has me guessing about their mind-set

[MAAT]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> Read the book of Genesis. God created the universe. No one can say it was human, animals and plants handiworks?

There we go, a completely new level of obtuse.
You do not read the book of genesis in it's original language but a stupid interpeted translation of it.
Not god but Elohym the consortium of all spirits , gods and goddeses that were thought to reside in everything, thus humans, rocks, water, animals, plants, filled the earth by deviding.
The were clueless about the universe. Heaven was about being able to measure the stars, and ended where the visible stars stopped, and the foundations of the earth.
That's what they (also the surronding areas) had as worldview.
No universe whatsoever.
NONE have claimed that human, animal or plants created the universe. Not even that anything was created.
But the phantasy needed to think up the stories is all human and comes from trying to explain what they observed in humans,=animals and plants.
And there are two cretion accounts from different sources in the same bible.

[MAAT]

Kong_ wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually, you have done very well.
It's dealing with someone with the intellect of a houseplant (or a POE) that has me guessing about their mind-set

Thank you, Kong.

I know 9-9, that's how it always starts!

So... it's like the TED talk by Frans de Waal, an animal behaviour experiment.:)))

Observe.

[thewordofme]

CBOW wrote:

<quoted text>
Your religion of atheism is a lie, why do you embrace and support lies? Trying to find solace in this worn out thread, I see.

Well, let’s see. Religion entails believing in a floaty thing that has no substance, cannot be seen by mortals, makes things (universes, galaxies, planets, suns, people, animals, plants, etc.) ex-nihilo, and knows everything there is to know about everything in the universe.

It also entails going to some kind of church or building where people congregate and say weird things and pray, praise, and sing in honor of the God mentioned above.

You must also tithe 10% of your net paycheck to this church or building so they can pay the pastor, who decides for you what the Bible means and makes sure you are not living in sin (which is usually connected with sex). Any moneys left over are put towards paying the mortgage, and sometimes missionary work.

Most of these churches/religions believe that their God made just two humans (male and female they were) about 6,000+- years ago, and that these 2 mated and produced children who then mated and, using incest at first, produced all the people on earth and are our ancestors

Most of these churches/religions also make their members believe that a man named Noah, on Gods direction, built a big wooden boat and took 2 or 7 of ALL animals on earth (including dinosaurs that lived 65+- million years before Noah) and sat out, in this boat, a Godly produced world-wide flood that lasted almost a year.

They also have to believe that a hundred years or so after the flood of Noah, God floated down from heaven and scrambled the language of some folks hanging around the plains of Shinar. Why he never scrambled the languages of China, India, the Americas, Korea, Japan, Malaysia, all of Europe and other parts of Asia are not known.

There are many other things they are required to believe, but time is short here.

Another thing these religions are required to do is bother and irritate people who are not of their own particular branch of insanity. Some of them are relegated to coming to these forums such as we are now on and act totally crazy and say the stupidest things and try to give atheists the heebie jeebies and nervous breakdown.

Now atheism, on the other hand, just requires that you don’t believe a God of any kind exists. If you want, you can join groups that promote atheism and donate money to them, but it is not required.

No meetings required, no beliefs to remember other than that there is no God. You don’t even have to admit you are an atheist…..but you really should proselytize those damn Christians.

[MAAT]

Thomas Robertson wrote:

woodtick57 wrote:
Then go ahead and disprove the existence of the FSM. it is the fastest growing religion on the planet, it must be real if you cannot disprove he is the ruler of all.
Charles Idemi wrote:
You can call God, whatever names you can, but nothing can change his identity as the most the high.
Charles, you must hold the world record for red herrings.

sigh.

But on a lighter note'the gobbledegook of the most the high, probably means El Ellyon, the El=mighty ot Ellyon, which as we know is the old name for Pergamom in Anatolia, on a mighty city mount, once thought to be part of the old KNan/Phenician/Omride cite-state bond.(The theory is still fresh)
Which had a huge library shared or rather stolen from Dendera on the coast where young and maybe old Homer wrote their respective works. Stolen as in Homer's work was hidden for generations, buried to keep from the rulers, Assyrian at that time had taken over.

[Alien Outlaw]

woodtick 57 wrote:

<quoted text>human existence. are you against it?

No, It? How humans came into "existence". Know the source. Alien engineering, creation or evolution....pick one if the brain will allow..........Basically, monkey DNA, a bible character or a highly evolved, highly advanced Alien Being.....simple logic.

[The Dude]

Alien Outlaw wrote:

<quoted text>No, It? How humans came into "existence". Know the source. Alien engineering, creation or evolution....pick one if the brain will allow..........Basically, monkey DNA, a bible character or a highly evolved, highly advanced Alien Being.....simple logic.

Very simple.

We still don't care.

[MAAT]

3579
CBOW [...]injected advanced DNA which were adam and eve.

:|:| means deja vu. So we are walking godsperm since eve was made from adam, how do you explain the female species?

(you know you shouldn't but another case of how does it tick.)
----------
Cybele wrote:
Me excluded them when I am the one who says God is the entirety of the universe? which includes everything even rocks. So rocks are not capable of love and caring which means they don't have a purpose? that's your logic. You know I was referring to humans when I say maybe we are here to experience love and you misinterpret it because you don't want any kind of God beliefs.

Bye.

We had the utility argument and now we have the : we are here for the purpose of experiencing love.
But it skips your inbuilt initial premises that we are meant to be created for the sake of being elevated.

What you make of life as in the meaning you give it is what makes life worth living for you.
Other people have other personal experiences and adopt other meaning according. Whatever works for people.
But there is the fact that your cognitive approach does not undo the technical aspects of inbuilt bio-chemistry and the empathy-gene without which you would not be able to experience it. Apart from the mindf!ck it would otherwise be.
But all your arguements still fail to proof that our environment was created for us.
(It's semantics, i agree. But your reasoning shows an undercurrent.)

[The Dude]

Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> Then shut up if you don't know.

No.

You know less than diddly (my pet vegetated gerbil, now deceased) and you don't shut up.(shrug)