Two Questions for Atheists/Evolutionists
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#965 Sep 5, 2013
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>
So? There is an equal (or more, I dont know the numbers) amount of Protys going to RC and doing the same.
You want to argue that one side is 100% wrong all the time, but they do the same to you...which means even by your logic both sides are right.
Don't you see that ? Even thru that cloud of self-righteousness...?
No, it's like 10 different perceptions of a single door leading from one room to another room; only that one door will actually get you there, regardless of what anyone else believes about it. There is only one way to salvation and Jesus made it clear that He is that way! And "my" logic doesn't mean both sides are "right"; it just means that both sides "believe" they're right. If both believe they are right and are using the same source for their belief, then only one can be interpreting the source correctly. The only way to interpret the Bible is by understanding the many aspects that go into comprehension of it, such as the language, culture, time period, etc. Then too, there is the plain truth of much of what it says as well that leave NO room for error unless one chooses to mangle the truth of it for their own selfish purposes. For example, Jesus says, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by Me." There is only one way to interpret this: Jesus is plainly stating that He ALONE is the way to salvation, yet look at all of the other religions that add to His proclamation by saying it is also of works, or baptism, or membership in a given religion, or blah blah blah. Only one way is true!
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#966 Sep 5, 2013
Nettiebelle wrote:
<quoted text>I was raised as a Southern Baptist in the souteast U.S.
I married a Catholic at the age of 20.
I attended both my church and the Catholic Church also for over 15 years before deciding to convert to Catholicism.
By that time, I had brought up my own kids in a Catholic school, and in helping them with their own Catechism and also attending Mass with them, I decided that the Catholic Church of today is the closest thing to representing the church Jesus founded when He appointed Peter as the first Pope, and for me it holds the most complete Truths of the teachings of Jesus.
All that really matters, Nettie, is what we say about Jesus and salvation. If we claim faith in Jesus, and only Jesus, plus nothing else, then we are saved. That is what Jesus himself said!
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#970 Sep 5, 2013
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not a sola scriptura fundamentalist. I thought you knew that.
God bless you.
To claim to be a Christian and deny God's word is like saying you believe in the sun while denying its warmth!

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#971 Sep 5, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
To claim to be a Christian and deny God's word is like saying you believe in the sun while denying its warmth!
Genesis is creation myth and foundation legend. That doesn't mean it's not God's word. It means it's not history. There is a lot of good theology in that old book but if you get bogged down in myth and legend you'll never see it.

I'm going to Mass now.
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#973 Sep 5, 2013
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
Genesis is creation myth and foundation legend. That doesn't mean it's not God's word. It means it's not history. There is a lot of good theology in that old book but if you get bogged down in myth and legend you'll never see it.
I'm going to Mass now.
What makes you think it is myth/legend?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#974 Sep 5, 2013
followerofSatan wrote:
"lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Better than you can comprehend. <quoted text> Yes He is omniscient and outside time.
<quoted text> God is outside time. We are inside time. There is a future for us but we don't know the relationship between what we view as the future and an Infinite Being outside time. I don't know what Isaiah 46:9 has to do with God planning everything. We are responsible for our actions. We can safely predict the behavior of certain individuals but that does not mean they are not responsible. Alcoholics will drink again and probably get into some kind of trouble as a result of their habitual alcohol abuse. Being ungodly it is not all that surprising we do not behave in manners pleasing to God."
post the source of your info on this god, and I hope it is not a picture of your anus...followerofchrist will have an instant erection...
Well i was going to respond to your post but seeing as how you are so crude i will pass. I think a certain level of civility and maturity is not to much to expect. Your unbelief is simply a license to be obnoxious. One wonders if you can even hold down a full time job involving people because you need certain social skills when dealing with people. None of that is demonstrated here.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#975 Sep 5, 2013
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Yeah. For two thousand years the prevaling explanation for the diversity of life on Earth was Aristotle's so-called ladder of life, with worms at the bottom and man at the top. Until Robert Hooke published 'Micrographia' nobody even knew single-celled organisms existed. It was another hundred years before people started seeing a continuum of life was a better explanation and a hundred years before the ladder of life was abandoned. If you think about it, special creation is no explanation at all.
God bless you.
I am not understanding why special creation is no explanation at all. Things that begin to exist need a cause. This initially was with a poster called highly evolved who at least was willing to consider Adam and Eve in theory. You are not even willing to do that. It became a true or false history thing with you. People discuss the meaning of fiction books all the time.

Your point about Micrographia and nobody knowing single celled organisms existing is nothing more than assumptions. You really don't know what everyone knew. They got along fine without knowing or going to the Moon. Macro evolution has no ancient precedent. You are right. It is modern assumption. Once again, the moderns know it all and the ancients were not all that bright. That is what you guys do. Marginalize everyone, past to present and ignore the fact the moderns have been wrong time and again. The evidence is there and that has never been the problem. Moderns come up with all kinds of assumptions which reject the evidence with nothing from history to back their conclusions.

Doubtful your point about Aristotle is accurate.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#976 Sep 5, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes you think it is myth/legend?
It never happened. That's what.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#978 Sep 5, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> I am not understanding why special creation is no explanation at all. Things that begin to exist need a cause. This initially was with a poster called highly evolved who at least was willing to consider Adam and Eve in theory. You are not even willing to do that. It became a true or false history thing with you. People discuss the meaning of fiction books all the time.
Your point about Micrographia and nobody knowing single celled organisms existing is nothing more than assumptions. You really don't know what everyone knew. They got along fine without knowing or going to the Moon. Macro evolution has no ancient precedent. You are right. It is modern assumption. Once again, the moderns know it all and the ancients were not all that bright. That is what you guys do. Marginalize everyone, past to present and ignore the fact the moderns have been wrong time and again. The evidence is there and that has never been the problem. Moderns come up with all kinds of assumptions which reject the evidence with nothing from history to back their conclusions.
Doubtful your point about Aristotle is accurate.
What a bunch of baboon excrement ! Nobody is saying the ancients were dumb but they knew little to nothing about science. The Bible's preocupation with astrologers and soothsayers, wizards and magicians is my witness.

My point about Aristotle is accurate.

God bless you.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#979 Sep 6, 2013
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
What a bunch of baboon excrement !
Why does special creation not explain anything? You made the claim and the burden of proof lies with he person making the claim. Or are you going to sleaze out of answering that valid question.
Nobody is saying the ancients were dumb but they knew little to nothing about science.
They knew enough to build building in which the moderns still cannot figure out how they done it. They had skilled craftmen able to accomplish incredible feats given their limited resources much of which involved engineer math skills to name a few.
The Bible's preocupation with astrologers and soothsayers, wizards and magicians is my witness.
They also had skilled craftmen as indicated above. Educated persons as in Daniel who were put to the top of the class trained to serve the King. These were a special class right up there with the wizards etc.
Big Al

Hibbing, MN

#980 Sep 6, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes you think it is myth/legend?
“Myth”, a word meaning: "A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society". Of course only the ancient stories of other people are myths.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#981 Sep 6, 2013
Ancients intuit atoms.

http://www.manyworldsoflogic.com/teleological...

The Atomists Counter the Teleological Argument

In the fifth century B.C., the Greek philosopher Leucippus of Miletus proposed a theory that bears an amazing likeness to modern atomic physics. Leucippus argued that if you were to begin cutting a piece of matter such as a rock into smaller and smaller pieces, the process could not go on forever; eventually you would have to reach particles that can no longer be cut in half. For if the process could go on forever, he argued, then there is no smallest particle, in which case any object of finite size is composed of an infinite number of parts each with a finite size. But it would then seem to follow that any finite object is really infinite in size, not finite, which is absurd (since an infinite number of finite parts adds up to an infinite quantity). Thus, Leucippus concluded, there must exist a smallest possible particle—too tiny to see—a particle of matter that cannot be cut in half, which he named an “atom”(Greek for an “uncuttable”). Everything, Leucippus argued, must be composed of atoms. The school of philosophical thought started by Leucippus and his colleague Democritus (ca 460-360 B.C.), came to be called “atomism” since it reduced all things to atoms.
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#984 Sep 6, 2013
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
It never happened. That's what.
And how do you know it never happened?
lol

Welch, WV

#985 Sep 6, 2013
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
Genesis is creation myth and foundation legend. That doesn't mean it's not God's word. It means it's not history. There is a lot of good theology in that old book but if you get bogged down in myth and legend you'll never see it.
I'm going to Mass now.
For what? To do your good deeds for the day?

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#986 Sep 6, 2013
lol wrote:
<quoted text>
For what? To do your good deeds for the day?
Mass? Of course. The celebration of the Eucharist is more important that gravity or air. Immediately after Mass we are having orientation for the parents of the First Communion and Confirmation candidates all this week. I don't suppose anyone would trust you with the spiritual instruction of their kids.

Today, being Friday, Mass was at seven AM. Otherwise, just the usual stuff; walked the dogs, went for a bicycle ride, taught a half dozen people irregular nouns and comparative adjectives.

Would you be kind enough to provide an example of an irregular noun or comparative adjective? Probably not.

The last parent orientation is tonight.

Oh, yeah, I composed a form letter to solicit funds for the fiesta. It lacks the NTTC number but I'll get that from Padre, maybe tonight, and start mailing those letters.

What did you do today?

God bless you.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#987 Sep 6, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
And how do you know it never happened?
I'm well educated. That's how.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#988 Sep 6, 2013
lightbeamrider wrote:
Ancients intuit atoms.
http://www.manyworldsoflogic.com/teleological...
The Atomists Counter the Teleological Argument
In the fifth century B.C., the Greek philosopher Leucippus of Miletus proposed a theory that bears an amazing likeness to modern atomic physics. Leucippus argued that if you were to begin cutting a piece of matter such as a rock into smaller and smaller pieces, the process could not go on forever; eventually you would have to reach particles that can no longer be cut in half. For if the process could go on forever, he argued, then there is no smallest particle, in which case any object of finite size is composed of an infinite number of parts each with a finite size. But it would then seem to follow that any finite object is really infinite in size, not finite, which is absurd (since an infinite number of finite parts adds up to an infinite quantity). Thus, Leucippus concluded, there must exist a smallest possible particle—too tiny to see—a particle of matter that cannot be cut in half, which he named an “atom”(Greek for an “uncuttable”). Everything, Leucippus argued, must be composed of atoms. The school of philosophical thought started by Leucippus and his colleague Democritus (ca 460-360 B.C.), came to be called “atomism” since it reduced all things to atoms.
That's nice. Have a cookie and tell us about "modern atomic physics".

Milk?

God bless you.
FollowerofChrist

Fairmont, WV

#989 Sep 6, 2013
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm well educated. That's how.
non answer

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#991 Sep 6, 2013
FollowerofChrist wrote:
<quoted text>
non answer
Of course it is. You're not educated. Figure it out.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#992 Sep 6, 2013
followerofSatan wrote:
<quoted text>
yeah, so what?.. did they prove anything?....you can propose a number of philosophical arguments... philosophy is not science and proves nothing....it is based on opinion until your utilize the scientific method and prove your hypothesis...wise up moron..
It's not a logic site nor a science site. It's an ID site.

"Thus, if we follow sound scientific practice and shave our theory with Ockam's Razor, monotheism seems more reasonable than polytheism."

"Who designed the designer?"

That's just a sampling from the linked page. The site is full of the same old shít.

God bless you.

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.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Blessings Upon You Israel. God Bless you, Israel. 19 min Cliff09 1
There are three kinds of Christians Extremist, ... 29 min Cliff09 10
Why lie about the truth? Christian mistranslat... 36 min Passing thru 336
PAUL OUR FATHER . 1Cor 4: 15 (Feb '16) 44 min Allen Richards 102
Poll Was Paul a False Apostle? (May '08) 49 min Allen Richards 5,944
A God Who Disagrees With The Data 53 min Passing thru 465
News Religion, higher education and critical thinking (Aug '15) 1 hr Passing thru 9,561
Cookie's Place (Oct '13) 1 hr I love Jesus 20,525
Scientific Proof Of GOD(for dummies) 1 hr Passing thru 2,431
More from around the web