“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571544 Dec 9, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Yes, but where's the record that all life came from a common ancestor, as Darwin suggests.
It's in the fossils and biochemistry, for starters. The evidence for the theory is everywhere. It's also in the comparative morphology of various organism, their embryology, and in biogeographical phenomena such as ring species

Darwin's central thesis, namely that the relatedness, diversity, complexity, and adaptability of all life on earth arose naturalistically from a single common ancestral microbial population through descent by modification over deep time due to biological variation, trait heritablity, and natural selection - is immovably established, and has been for several decades.

Damaging as it may be to the nation, the dissent of Christians is of no scientific import.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571545 Dec 9, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." -Darwin
karl44 wrote:
the quote is out of context and a shameful lie parroted from deceitful christian apologetic
RiversideRedneck wrote:
That's Darwin's quote, deal with it.
It's already been dealt with. and Karl's right. In fact, this is such an egregious and infamous example of quote mining that it is used as an example of the practice in the Wiki on quote mining (Fallacy of quoting out of context): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoti...

Aren't you the one that screams the loudest about being taken out of context?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571546 Dec 9, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Not "some god". God.
Does that word refer to the Vaticinatin' Jehovah-Jesus? Every "God" is just "some god," whether you mean Nergal, Obatala, Aigle, Aglauros, Egle, Heget, Yun Dun, Väinämöinen, Varpulis, Chloris, Bilfrost, Big Head, or Jehovah-Jesus

It gets old having to ask each poster which god they mean by the word "God." Try to be a little less ambiguous.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571547 Dec 9, 2012
God Himself wrote:
How does one measure an expression or action to test the degree of intelligence that is being demonstrated?
I don't know. It's problematic. Why?
God Himself wrote:
What I'm trying to find out exactly, is this: if the processes (natural or otherwise) that created an intelligent being are not a demonstration of intelligence; then how is man' ability to super intelligent machines and ultra intelligent entities, in any way a demonstration of intelligence?
All problem solving ability in sentient creatures is intelligence. If man invents machines to help him, he has demonstrated intelligence.
God Himself wrote:
Simply put: if natural intelligence doesn't exist, then how are you intelligent; supernaturally?
Natural intelligence probably does exist. Why do you assume that it doesn't? Arguing that there is no such thing as natural intelligence, and that therefore the presence of intelligence in the universe is evidence of a god, would be a circular argument, wouldn't it?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571548 Dec 9, 2012
God Himself wrote:
Come to think of it; how is it that you can believe "natural selection", but you deny "natural intelligence"?[/WQUOTE]

I believe many things, but I don't believe in anything. That's for children.

And I don't deny natural intelligence, although it seems that you do if you invoke supernatural agency to account for it.

[QUOTE who="God Himself"]I detect ill-logic and hypocrisy in you.
Ditto on the first. I don't recall any hypocrisy from you yet, but my memory is imperfect, and I haven't read everything that you've posted, either.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571549 Dec 9, 2012
Edited from http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TOCO8TE... :
God Himself wrote:
Make yourself plain and stop "psycho-babbling" ... YOUR HONESTY MUST DEPEND ON MY HONESTY as the context may be; in that the same standard used to measure your honesty must be the exact one used to measure my honesty.
That's right there is what I call babble. Who's measuring anything here?
God Himself wrote:
My accuracy and you honesty are independent variables; I agree ... So as a matter of fact there is an if/then to it.
I guess that that is meaningful to you.
God Himself wrote:
The Law of Equality must prevail: you aint goin nowhere... unless what I understand is not what you mean.
What "Law of Equality"? I can't find this term anywhere except in a legal context, such as these:

"To even speak of the law of equality, or the "equal protection of the laws," one must recognize that the central issue of equality is a legal one, not a factual one." http://www.lonang.com/conlaw/6/c67.htm

"it does not break the law of equality in the constitution" http://www.ruthlesscriticism.com/equality.htm

" the law of equality. To understand the law of equal protection, we must understand not only what the drafters of the Equal Protection Clause intended"

"the General Assembly unanimously approved the Law of Equality, Fairness, and the Elimination of Discrimination Against"

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571550 Dec 9, 2012
God Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
In light of this fact, why is it that you fail to appreciate that there may be validity in religions material such as scriptures and symbols in that, they may contain profound insight into the nature of reality?
Why do you say that I failed to consider that there may be validity in religion? I did. I also considered whether there was validity in astrology and Ouija boards.
God Himself wrote:
You use the expression "religious faith" quite ambiguously there? "Faith" implies "confidence or trust in a person or thing"
[http://dictionary.reference.c om/browse/faith?s=t&ld=112 5]
I'd say that you are the one reintroducing the ambiguity that I am attempting to remove by not the using the word "faith" in two radically different ways in the same discussion. a clear cut example of an equivocation fallacy.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571551 Dec 9, 2012
God Himself wrote:
"Religious" implies "scrupulously faithful; conscientious: religious care" {http://dictionary.reference.c om/browse/religious?s=t&ld =1125}

What do you mean by religious?
Religious is the adjectival form of religion. Religious faith is the faith characterized by religious belief. It's cardinal features are its lack of sufficient evidentiary support, it's rigidity, and its indifference to contradictory evidence.
God Himself wrote:
A man can be religious about facts.
A man can be religious about science.
A MAN CAN BE RELIGIOUS ABOUT EVOLUTION though evidence is not proof; much like yourself?
Those are derivative definitions, based on the literal one. An analogous set of definitions exists for the word baby. The most literal meaning of baby is a newborn human being. Many other meaning have been derived, such as a girlfriend that is dear, or a favorite possession like a classic car because it is precious, or an immature adult because it cries, or a newborn anything such as a baby spider, or my wife, who is the youngest of three sibs and is called the baby of her family.

Here's a derivative definition of religious: "They have sex religiously - twice a year every Christmas and Easter."It's not the one I mean when I say "religious faith"
God Himself wrote:
How are you not demonstrating religious faith and religious zeal and religious fervour by so adamantly advocating for evolution theory?
Because my belief is supported by evidence, is commensurate with the quality and quantity of that evidence, and is amenable to modification if unexpected new evidence surfaces. Religious faith is none of those.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571552 Dec 9, 2012
God Himself wrote:
Evidence is not proof, it "lends" support.
Evidence can be proof.
God Himself wrote:
I can give evidence of God but that will not be proof that He exists. You can give evidence of evolution but that will not prove that it exists.
The evidence for a god and the evidence for evolution are as different as they can be. Evolution is a fact. The theory is confirmed.

If "God" means Jehovah-Jesus, there is enough evidence to rule "God" out.

“This is Bananas!”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#571554 Dec 9, 2012
God does exist. I just know he does because he has blessed me with my two beautiful both and an amazing life. Love GOD first, love yourself more and the rest will take care of itself. Heaven isn't just a phone call away you know. Heaven is calling you everyday asking if you want to accept a call from ETERNITY. I know I do. Be passionate about life and pray often.

In fact, you have just inspired me to blog about this very topic at http://www.empowernetwork.com/google_com/

I will let you know when I post it there because I'll certainly share it with you and those who are followers of LORD. Lets pull more non believers over to the right path. God knows you have it in you to believe.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571555 Dec 9, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Again with the Tripoli thing?
That was a negatiation & ass kissing tactic to not go to war with Muslim pirates. It was intended to let them know that America will not have a Holy War - a war casued by and for a religion.
Nothing more.
Even if that were true, so what? Are you claiming that Congress and the president unanimously lied about their beliefs when they wrote that, "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"? The statement was true then and it is true today.
BadBreathBruce

Auckland, New Zealand

#571556 Dec 9, 2012
If religion is not permitted to be taught in schools, then neither should evolution/atheism. Fair comment, I reckon.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571557 Dec 9, 2012
Just Results wrote:
Christians, on the other hand, carry a torch of responsibility, are courageous , and are intelligent.
You're none of those things.

[1] As for intelligent, that isn't even worthy of rebuttal. If you had just attacked Hollywood, you'd be OK. You took on science. You couldn't have made a worse tactical blunder.

[2] Regarding responsibility, Christianity is a way of avoiding accountability for your moral crimes. You simply demand forgiveness from the ceiling fan and move on without making restitution or apologizing to your victim if you prefer not to. What is the accountability for a person who sets off a bomb killing dozens, then finds Jesus and dies of a heart attack before he is brought to justice? He goes straight to heaven.

And look at how irresponsibly your assault on science is. It has crippled America's scientific and technological competitiveness, and by dumbing down so many Americans and causing them to distrust the climate scientists, your religion leaves America vulnerable to global climate change disinformation.

[3] And Christianity is cowardice in the extreme. Here's what takes courage: Try standing up like the bipedal ape you were born to be, and look out into the universe, which may be almost empty, and which may contain no gods at all. And then face and accept the very real possibility that we may be all there is for light years.

Accept that you may be vulnerable and not watched over. Accept the likelihood of your own mortality and finititude. Accept the reality of your insignificance everywhere but earth, and that you might be unloved except by those who know you - people, and maybe a few animals. Because as far as we know, that's how it is.

It's unpleasant at first, but be brave! The sloppy comfort of religion may be appealing, but it comes at a great cost. It's infantilizing, and costs you your only shot at an authentic existence. A theist can never know the ineffable joy of doing good for goodness sake, with no expectation that anyone will ever know what good you did or reward you for it.

“Move into the light.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#571558 Dec 9, 2012
BadBreathBruce wrote:
If religion is not permitted to be taught in schools, then neither should evolution/atheism. Fair comment, I reckon.

Atheism is not taught in school.
Also you seem to be really really confused when you say
evolution/atheism as if they are somehow connected or synonymous , when in reality evolution is a science and atheism is not in any way an academic subject. But rater a rejection of belief in gods.
The truth atheism could not legally be taught in school any more than religion.

Fair comment? NO!
Fairly ignorant...YES!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571559 Dec 9, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
If atheist, why serve people? They have no souls and just end up dead in the ground anyway? Why not make slaves out of them?
The fact that you ask such a question suggests that your faith has deprived you of an important element of mature, authentic human existence - an autonomous internal moral compass.

It generates a feeling that most irreligious people I know experience, but many of the faithful seem unfamiliar with. It's experienced as an internal urge that one ignores at ones own peril. If you have a conscience, you learn to heed it, and feel satisfaction, or you suffer, usually some combination of shame, guilt, self-loathing, and regret.

People don't need religion, and certainly not to be good people. But once raised in it, it seems that many Christians indicate that they cannot be good without it. Isn't that what your question necessarily implies?

To me, that's not much of a recommendation for a Christian upbringing. In fact, I'd say that exposure to religion should probably be delayed until at a certain state of maturity is reached. Certainly, people should have a chance to develop critical thinking skills and a conscience before being subjected to religion. You wouldn't object to that, would you?

Wouldn't you have been better off if you they had allowed you to develop a conscience sufficient to keep you from killing people without religion like the rest of us have before they derailed the process by introducing the Christian god?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571560 Dec 9, 2012
God Himself wrote:
You cant interpret the Bible with your common knowledge; it posses technical terms or jargon. So there may be words that you know but their meanings are different.
You have to be familiar with the technical terminologies before you can read and comprehend the Bible.
You just earned a place on this growing list of actual ...

REASONS GIVEN ON TOPIX WHY SKEPTICS AREN'T QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE BIBLE

[1] I took the scripture out of context. It means something other than what it says (context and implied meaning never supplied).
[2] I don't understand literary criticism
[3] It's an allegory, not literal.
[4] It's literal, not an allegory.
[5] Scripture is only transparent to those with a child's perspective
[6] Scripture is only transparent to biblical scholars
[7] I am not filled with the Holy Spirit
[8] That's the mystery of it all. "God works in mysterious ways"
[9] Man's mind is too puny to grasp the immensity of God's truth and justice.
[10] You were obviously never a "true christian"
[11] You don't have enough faith. You have to believe to understand.
[12] You can’t criticize the bible because you don’t believe or understand it.
[13] Why do we think we can pretend to know God?
[14] Scripture always interprets scripture
[15] Ever heard of biblical hermeneutics?
[16] You are not TRULY with truth and sincerity seeking God.
[17] You have to know how to translate Hebrew and Greek
[18] You are using a completely unsupportable transliteration of Scripture
[19] You have clearly not studied the ancient peoples who wrote those things or you would not come up with the conclusions you have.
[20] It takes humility to understand the Bible
[21]“Stop scripture mining."
[22] You have to be familiar with the technical terminologies in the bible before you can comprehend it.

“saved From jesus”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#571561 Dec 9, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You just earned a place on this growing list of actual ...
REASONS GIVEN ON TOPIX WHY SKEPTICS AREN'T QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE BIBLE
[1] I took the scripture out of context. It means something other than what it says (context and implied meaning never supplied).
[2] I don't understand literary criticism
[3] It's an allegory, not literal.
[4] It's literal, not an allegory.
[5] Scripture is only transparent to those with a child's perspective
[6] Scripture is only transparent to biblical scholars
[7] I am not filled with the Holy Spirit
[8] That's the mystery of it all. "God works in mysterious ways"
[9] Man's mind is too puny to grasp the immensity of God's truth and justice.
[10] You were obviously never a "true christian"
[11] You don't have enough faith. You have to believe to understand.
[12] You can’t criticize the bible because you don’t believe or understand it.
[13] Why do we think we can pretend to know God?
[14] Scripture always interprets scripture
[15] Ever heard of biblical hermeneutics?
[16] You are not TRULY with truth and sincerity seeking God.
[17] You have to know how to translate Hebrew and Greek
[18] You are using a completely unsupportable transliteration of Scripture
[19] You have clearly not studied the ancient peoples who wrote those things or you would not come up with the conclusions you have.
[20] It takes humility to understand the Bible
[21]“Stop scripture mining."
[22] You have to be familiar with the technical terminologies in the bible before you can comprehend it.
[23] Even Satan can quote scripture.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571562 Dec 9, 2012
God Himself wrote:
it a heck of a lot more promising than the world suggested by evolution theory; at least a God night have mercy, but in a Godless world there is no hope nor chance.
Your god offers no mercy. I am guilty of nothing deserving punishment and don't require mercy. Any punishment for being the best person I knew how to be is sadistic and unjust. And those in hell are said to have no hope for mercy.

Your metaphysics would be terrifying to you if you thought about them a bit. If you had a choice, it would be much better to be born into the world I imagine, where death offers release, than in the one you imagine inhabited by capricious and sadistic monsters, torture dungeons, and souls prevented from rest by a god that keeps them conscious just to make them suffer more.

Seriously. Isn't that what you believe? Now look again at what you just wrote about that.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571563 Dec 9, 2012
boooots wrote:
<quoted text>
I really wonder where these people get the idea that they have some inside knowledge that those of us, many who spent 40 or 50 years in religion, don't have. Sort of along the same line as Patty's, you have to be "born again" in order to find God.
That wondering stuff was just a figure of speech, right? Of course you know where they get their ideas from. Every cult teaches that it has arcane knowledge, while outsiders are fools that "have eyes but see not"

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#571564 Dec 9, 2012
God Himself wrote:
You are an illiterate baboon and an arrogant piece of shit: THUS SAITH THE LORD.
You can do better than this.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Harry Reid: "I'm Glad I Lied On Romney!" 8 min I Knew It 1
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 11 min kent 579,447
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 20 min Epiphany2 609,996
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 1 hr Neelakaran 5,937
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Pegasus 270,215
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 1 hr River Tam 2,054
gay bottom in gurgaon (May '14) 2 hr ashokS 13
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 6 hr RiccardoFire 39,987
More from around the web