|
Uh-Oh, here comes a God vs Science thread |
23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
|
Jesse Lenney said: I'm not about to invest a ton of time gathering evidence for you that completely falsifies creationism. DO IT DO IT DO IT /fistpump -- |
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
|
Jesse Lenney said: 1. Wrong Neil, Neil. I know who you were talking to... it's still silly to make a claim and then completely fail to even try to support it. Why are you posting links to evidence that the Earth is old when no one here has claimed that the Earth is young? Quote: 2. I'm not about to invest a ton of time gathering evidence for you that completely falsifies creationism. If you're so curious, go do the research yourself. I have. So far I've only seen Young Earth Creationism and straw men torn down.
|
blargmob
Member #8,356
February 2007
|
Neil Black said: Why are you posting links to evidence that the Earth is old when no one here has claimed that the Earth is young? CREATIONISM. C-R-E-A-T-I-O-N-I-S-M. I didn't "fail" at anything. You're simply too lazy to research yourself. Typical --- |
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
The Piltdown Man was a hoax, so it follows that evolution is obviously not true. It only took the scientific community what, 40 years, to figure that one out? Have you even been alive 40 years? Everything you know is wrong. Only Derezo has the truth. |
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
|
Nah, you used the idea that the earth was created 6000 years ago when the evidence clearly states otherwise as a reason the bible and therefore the idea of a God is wrong. When the bible doesn't say anything of the sort. I certainly hope that wasn't your only reason for not believing in God or you could be in trouble. The beauty is, the idea that the earth has been around for who knows how long doesn't effect my beliefs one bit. I don't follow any of this world's churches, I only read the bible and believe what it states. I assume you don't believe things had a start, that they were not created and that matter has existed forever... yet when I claim God has always existed, it gets disputed... hmmm... interesting... What came first, the chicken or the egg? I know the answer, the Chicken. God created it. --- |
23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
|
Jesse Lenney said: You're simply too lazy to research yourself. The point being made was that we already had. Quote: Typical Indeed. If this is what you've been reduced to, let me help you out. First line of Wikipedia: "Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural being." Now apparently you have scientific proof that God didn't create everything. Since it's already been pretty much decided by both the theists and the atheists in this thread that there's not a direct logical contradiction between "here's the general scientific timeline of the universe" and "God done it", maybe you'd like to enlighten us all? -- |
blargmob
Member #8,356
February 2007
|
Neil Roy said: I only read the bible and believe what it states. This always puzzles me. Why? Why believe something that has no barring on any real evidence? Accepting the Bible as truth despite all the contradictory scientific evidence is just like accepting the existence of a magical pink unicorn, or holding faith in a napkin: (the following image is your logic exactly) {"name":"603855","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/9\/5\/95f0f92cada1a332eca058ed2899e356.jpg","w":400,"h":400,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/9\/5\/95f0f92cada1a332eca058ed2899e356"} --- |
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
|
Jesse Lenney said: CREATIONISM. C-R-E-A-T-I-O-N-I-S-M. Yes? What does that have to do with the age of the Earth? I've already stated that no one is arguing for a young Earth here. Quote: I didn't "fail" at anything. You're simply too lazy I'm too lazy because I pointed out that the evidence you cited has no bearing on what's being discussed right now? Jesse Lenney said: Accepting the Bible as truth despite all the contradictory scientific evidence is just like accepting the existence of a magical pink unicorn, or holding faith in a napkin: What is the contradictory scientific evidence? I've never seen evidence that contradicted anything but a straw man.
|
23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
|
Jesse Lenney said: Why? Why believe something that has no barring on any real evidence? Yeah, Neil. Because the Bible contradicts all historical, geographical and archeological evidence. So there. Quote: Accepting the Bible as truth despite all the contradictory scientific evidence is just like accepting the existence of a magical pink unicorn, or holding faith in a napkin I have faith in napkins. I won't eat lunch without them. -- |
blargmob
Member #8,356
February 2007
|
23yrold3yrold said: Yeah, Neil. Because the Bible contradicts all historical, geographical and archeological evidence. Bingo! --- |
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
|
I believe that was sarcasm.
|
23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
|
Neil Black said: I believe that was sarcasm. You have chosen ... wisely. -- |
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
|
Jesse Lenney said: Why? Why believe something that has no barring on any real evidence? Accepting the Bible as truth despite all the contradictory scientific evidence is just like accepting the existence of a magical pink unicorn, or holding faith in a napkin: First off, 23yrold3yrold, I love your humour, you've kept me laughing. Secondly, Jesse, you don't know sarcasm when you read it apparently. I didn't just pick up the bible one day and decide, hey, I think I'll believe this! I done a lot of thinking about it over the years, the same questions we all think about. Where we come from, where are we going, why do I exist etc. After much thought and careful contemplation on the subject I came to the conclusion that there is simply too much evidence that an intelligent all powerful creator exists (whatever His name is, I do not know, we label Him God). All one has to do is to look around objectively rather than cynically, and one sees the evidence all around us of an extremely intelligent design, just need to look at our own bodies for that. I won't argue evolution in here, it is a pointless argument, and I already know you are lining up some arguments and sarcasm against me, your little napkin response is the very reason why I don't like to argue my beliefs. But I am merely stating that I didn't come to my conclusions over night. This has been a long journey for me that started around 18 years old when I was thrown in jail for crimes I didn't commit, and through a series of events lead me to end up in the hold where I wasn't allowed to read anything else but the bible. I often wonder about those events and if there was something else at work in my life... but anyhow, I didn't just blindly pick up a book and decide to believe what it said. I won't argue it, especially with someone who can't carry on an intelligent conversation without throwing in "napkin" images. But that is my story in condensed form. --- |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Neil Roy said: I came to the conclusion that there is simply too much evidence that an intelligent all powerful creator exists Please do share. -- |
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
|
Thomas Fjellstrom said: Please do share. No thanks. OR in the words of Jesse Lenney: "If you're so curious, go do the research yourself." I have confirmed my beliefs to myself to the point where I know God exists. I don't expect you to accept them, I am merely stating how I feel because someone asked. --- |
blargmob
Member #8,356
February 2007
|
Neil Roy said: I have confirmed my beliefs to myself to the point where I know God exists. Wow! You managed to brainwash yourself! Impressive! {"name":"603856","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/0\/5\/05028df604f1fea14b27374c88e04f2e.jpg","w":894,"h":700,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/0\/5\/05028df604f1fea14b27374c88e04f2e"} --- |
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
|
As a side note: notice two people who have avatars from "Christmas" in place still. Did you boys enjoy celebrating Christ's birth? Oh and Jesse, i don't "ignore contradicting evidence". That would require that you post some "evidence" for me to ignore to start with. --- |
23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
|
Neil Roy said: OR in the words of Jesse Lenney: "If you're so curious, go do the research yourself." Oh; well done! The atheists must now harken to the gospel of Jesse! Be inspired by his faith in the existence of contradicting evidence per his forum pictar! Spend an hour a day meditating on the lolcat Bible so ye may post meaningless rhetoric, unshaken by the heathen! Neil Roy said: 23yrold3yrold, I love your humour, you've kept me laughing. Yeah, the serious train has pretty much left the thread a page back. -- |
blargmob
Member #8,356
February 2007
|
Oh no! I celebrate Christmas out of tradition and people think I'm a religious zealot! Whatever shall I do!? {"name":"603857","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/3\/7\/37135acb4c7151043b3a06a175712071.jpg","w":310,"h":386,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/3\/7\/37135acb4c7151043b3a06a175712071"} --- |
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
|
There's yet another misconception. Sex was the original sin, no, it was not. Disobeying God was the original sin. Sex between a married couple is called "holy" in the bible. In fact, Christ at one point recommends that it is better that you get married than to burn with lust. Namely because sex inside marriage is not sinful, but good. It was God that commanded Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply, can't do that without sex. You celebrating Christ's birth (he wasn't actually born Dec 25th, but conceived around that time, he was born closer to the end of Sept, 6 months after John the baptist, his cousin, was born)... anyhow, you celebrating Christ's birth for any reason would be like me celebrating the date Darwin came up with evolution. Seems a tad hypocritical. --- |
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
|
Neil Roy said: In fact, Christ at one point recommends that it is better that you get married than to burn with lust. I thought that was Paul. Quote: you celebrating Christ's birth for any reason would be like me celebrating the date Darwin came up with evolution. Seems a tad hypocritical. Christmas is a major part of American culture. It's completely possible to celebrate Christmas here without linking it to religion.
|
blargmob
Member #8,356
February 2007
|
Too bad I am not celebrating Christmas for the birth of a man that probably never existed, and if he did, he sure wasn't divine. I celebrate out of tradition, with the rest of the family. Deal with it --- |
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
|
That could have been Paul, I'll have to double check. As for christmas, I don't celebrate it at all myself, how ironic is that? --- |
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
|
Jesse Lenney said: a man that probably never existed You betray your ignorance. It is very probable (as probable as anything else in history) that Jesus existed. You can argue his divinity, but there was definitely a man named Jesus that started a major religious movement two thousand years ago.
|
blargmob
Member #8,356
February 2007
|
Neil Black said: there was definitely a man named Jesus Hayzoos? --- |
|
|