spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#350 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
<quoted text>
No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.
You should get together with MUQ, cause he says the same thing about the Quran which is also the perfect word of God according to him.

Try reading the posts to this forum instead of spamming, and you may learn something :)
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#351 May 16, 2013
and incidentally, Archaeology has DIS-proved the Bible. Archaeology has proved there were no Jews in Eygpt, no exodus, no conquest of Canaan and the remaining events were hugely exaggerated or didnt happen at all.
bohart

Newport, TN

#352 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
[continued]
<quoted text>
Pahu: IS CREATION BY GOD RATIONAL?
A last desperate tactic by sceptics to avoid a theistic conclusion is to assert that creation in time is incoherent. Davies correctly points out that since time itself began with the beginning of the universe, it is meaningless to talk about what happened ‘before’ the universe began. But he claims that causes must precede their effects. So if nothing happened ‘before’ the universe began, then (according to Davies) it is meaningless to discuss the cause of the universe’s beginning.
But the philosopher (and New Testament scholar) William Lane Craig, in a useful critique of Davies,10 pointed out that Davies is deficient in philosophical knowledge. Philosophers have long discussed the notion of simultaneous causation. Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) gave the example of a weight resting on a cushion simultaneously causing a depression in it. Craig says:
The first moment of time is the moment of God's creative act and of creation's simultaneous coming to be.
Some skeptics claim that all this analysis is tentative, because that is the nature of science. So this can’t be used to prove creation by God. Of course, sceptics can't have it both ways: saying that the Bible is wrong because science has proved it so, but if science appears consistent with the Bible, then well, science is tentative anyway.
A FINAL THOUGHT
The Bible informs us that time is a dimension that God created, into which man was subjected. It even tells us that one day time will no longer exist. That will be called "eternity." God Himself dwells outside of the dimension He created (2 Timothy 1:9, Titus 1:2). He dwells in eternity and is not subject to time. God spoke history before it came into being. He can move through time as a man flips through a history book.
Because we live in the dimension of time, it is impossible for us to fully understand anything that does not have a beginning and an end. Simply accept that fact, and believe the concept of God's eternal nature the same way you believe the concept of space having no beginning and end—by faith—even though such thoughts put a strain on our distinctly insufficient cerebrum.
http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c039.ht...
Excellent!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#353 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
Throughout our lives, we learn that effects always have causes.
False. And we've already been over this. Since you haven't addressed this yet you are still repeating spam and lying.
Pahu wrote:
As explained, every effect must have a cause. God is not an effect; He is the original cause of everything and everyone.
Which does not require a cause. You have yet to prove the universe requires a cause, that your god doesn't need it, or even in fact that it exists at all.
Pahu wrote:
Walt Brown received a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he was a National Science Foundation Fellow. He has taught college courses in physics, mathematics, and computer science.
Which confirms my assertion that he is not a physicist, chemist, nor a biologist. By the way, he only taught physics for a year. Good job too, as his creationist claims show a complete lack of understanding of the subject.

Of course none of what you say makes any difference to the fact that he's a known liar for Jesus.
Pahu wrote:
but after years of study, he became convinced of the scientific validity of creation and a global flood.
Just one problem - the area he "studied" was apologetics, not science. Global flood fails on numerous levels. The only get-out clause is magic.
Pahu wrote:
Since retiring from the military, Dr. Brown has been the Director of the Center for Scientific Creation and has worked full time in research, writing, and teaching on creation and the flood.
This is a fine example of what I was talking about - they don't DO research. Hence Brown is a liar.
Pahu wrote:
For those who wish to know more about Walt Brown, a new book (Christian Men of Science: Eleven Men Who Changed the World by George Mulfinger and Julia Mulfinger Orozco) devotes a chapter to Brown.
BWA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAA!!!

Sorry bub, but Brown is NOT very well known beyond creation/evolution circles, and the most he did to change the world was when he was working with a MASSIVE team of buddies at NASA, none of which had anything to do with creation "science". Since the term is an oxymoron.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#354 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
<quoted text>
Pahu: Not at all. Brown's conclusions are confirmed by the scientists he quotes
Except they aren't.

And both you and he know this due to all the scientific organisations you mentioned accepting modern science. This means accepting scientific concepts like biological evolution and an old Earth. Both of which you and he reject.

Lying for your case only helps to destroy your case.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#355 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
<quoted text>
Pahu: As explained, every effect must have a cause. God is not an effect; He is the original cause of everything and everyone.
I notice that apart from not supplying a single shred of evidence you merely repeated your claim without actually addressing the post.

This is why you fail.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#356 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
Paul Davies writes
And was subsequently quotemined by AIG. Hence no original source is given.
Misa

Weymouth, UK

#357 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
1. Archaeology has confirmed the historical accuracy of the Bible:
So what? The Harry Potter books refer to real places, cultures and landmarks too.
Pahu wrote:
2. The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate:
Bollocks.
Pahu wrote:
3. The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:
Bollocks.
Pahu wrote:
No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.
Bollocks.

If you want to see a "secular" book filled with uncountably many accurate prophecies, and also providing methods _which work_ allowing you to make your own accurate prophecies, consult a physics or engineering text.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#358 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
But the philosopher (and New Testament scholar) William Lane Craig, in a useful critique of Davies,10 pointed out that Davies is deficient in philosophical knowledge.
Which is fine, because there's no such thing. The only "knowledge" one can have about philosophy is of philosophers and their philosophies. However philosophical points of view are not knowledge, and also can quite often be BS. Either way, it renders philosophy impotent when it comes to the scientific arena.
Pahu wrote:
Some skeptics claim that all this analysis is tentative, because that is the nature of science. So this can’t be used to prove creation by God. Of course, sceptics can't have it both ways: saying that the Bible is wrong because science has proved it so, but if science appears consistent with the Bible, then well, science is tentative anyway.
In some areas it may be consistent. But in many many MANY others it quite simply is not. And though you may claim that science is only "tentative", and it is, contrary to your claims that does not automatically give any old BS you come up with any credibility. In fact your BS remains BS until you can demonstrate that current scientific standings that contradict your assertions are false.

As it is you fundies are unable to do that.(shrug)
Pahu wrote:
Because we live in the dimension of time, it is impossible for us to fully understand anything that does not have a beginning and an end. Simply accept that fact, and believe the concept of God's eternal nature the same way you believe the concept of space having no beginning and end—by faith—even though such thoughts put a strain on our distinctly insufficient cerebrum.
Translation: "We have no evidence whatsoever and can't understand it anyway so the Bible iz troo cuz teh Bible sez so. SO THERE!"

FANTASTIC argument ya got there, Pahu.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#359 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
The one and only true, living, creator God who reveals Himself in the Holy Bible. But is the Bible accurate? Consider:
Bible Accuracy
1. Archaeology has confirmed the historical accuracy of the Bible:
It has also confirmed the historical accuracy of the ancient Egyptians and Greeks.

Of course all the archaeological finds in the world STILL wouldn't be evidence that Jesus walked on water.(shrug)
Pahu wrote:
2. The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate
Except when it isn't. Earth ain't flat. It ain't young. Adam and Eve never were the only two humans on Earth. Donkey's and lizards do not talk. Global flood is plain fiction. And we can quite easily demonstrate why, but you wouldn't understand it and have to accept the Bible no matter what, just like you said in your last post.(shrug)
Pahu wrote:
3. The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:

No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.
I'd say it's about as good as Nostradamus.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#360 May 16, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
You should get together with MUQ, cause he says the same thing about the Quran which is also the perfect word of God according to him.
Try reading the posts to this forum instead of spamming, and you may learn something :)
Pahu is hardly more than a spambot. Even the MUQ of today is capable of more conversing than him.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#361 May 16, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent!
How so? And when are you gonna get around to responding to the posts from last time?

Oh, that's right - you never do. Go on, make a lame joke about puddle goo then run along little one.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#362 May 16, 2013
It's also worth noting that some of the stuff Pahu referenced here has come from a one Mr Norman Geisler, who apart from being a typical Flinstones is a science documentary YEC, thinks UFO's are agents of Satan. And Bananaman, Ray Comfort.
Thinking

London, UK

#363 May 16, 2013
Bollocks.
Never seen him down the pub.
Pahu wrote:
<quoted text>
The one and only true, living, creator God who reveals Himself in the Holy Bible. But is the Bible accurate? Consider:
Bible Accuracy
1. Archaeology has confirmed the historical accuracy of the Bible:
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/the_rocks_cry...
http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a008.ht...
http://www.campuslight.org/wvu/EvidencesCFait... http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/h...
2. The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate:
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science...
3. The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/
http://www.100prophecies.org/
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/bible-proph...
http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-prophecy-evi...
http://www.allabouttruth.org/Bible-Prophecy.h...
No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#364 May 16, 2013
Thinking wrote:
A stuffed Ewok has more integrity than Pahu.
<quoted text>
Correct.

Which is why I'm skipping his Wall-Of-Words.

:D

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#365 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
[continued]
<quoted text>
Pahu: IS CREATION BY GOD RATIONAL?
No.

Next!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#366 May 16, 2013
Pahu wrote:
Liars For Jewsus website-- dismissed.
Thinking

Hounslow, UK

#367 May 17, 2013
I got as far as the second line of his Chuck Norris straw man fantasy and glazed over.

That di*k needs to bring some evidence to the table.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Correct.
Which is why I'm skipping his Wall-Of-Words.
:D

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#368 May 17, 2013
The Ten commandments was stolen from The Code of Hammurabi Jewish Yaweh replaces the Sumerian Sun God Shamash aka Azazel25
Jewish Joseph with the eleven brothers was stolen from Egyptian Psammetichus22
The wanderings in the desert were based upon the Sun-God Bacchus as seen in the Hymns of Orpheus 12
Jewish Moses was stolen from several Gods and kings, depending on what stage of his life story:

Sargon (the birth and abandonment in the river, being rescued by royalty, etc)
Pahu wrote:
<quoted text>
Pahu: As explained, every effect must have a cause. God is not an effect; He is the original cause of everything and everyone.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#369 May 17, 2013
The Dude wrote:
It's also worth noting that some of the stuff Pahu referenced here has come from a one Mr Norman Geisler, who apart from being a typical Flinstones is a science documentary YEC, thinks UFO's are agents of Satan. And Bananaman, Ray Comfort.
LOL

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 15 min Dave Nelson 230,003
Islam for peace, or violence? 2 hr Uncle Sam 32
Our world came from nothing? 2 hr Uncle Sam 1,036
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 9 hr Chiclets 22,987
Adam Atheoi - the god of 'humanity' 20 hr Thinking 90
Man center of the universe. 20 hr Thinking 87
Razer and Ben Affleck take on the atheists Oct 17 Thinking 6

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE