• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Creationist have problems with evolution because evolution makes sense.

Evolution can be analysed, scrutinized and picked at in every department,
creationism on the other hand can not, you take creationism for what it is, a story,
you either believe the story or you don't, no analysing, scrutinizing or picking at.

Creationists of course will say that creationism makes sense, but only if you believe in magic,
once you can get your head to believe in magic everything about creationism falls into place,
as there's no magic about evolution creationists can not bring themselves to believe it's true.
 
Last edited:

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,211
52,660
Guam
✟5,154,085.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Evolution can be analysed, scrutinized and picked at in every department...
Yup --- and I've got four departments right here that say evolution can take a hike.
... creationism on the other hand can not, you take creationism for what it is, a story,
you either believe the story or you don't, no analysing, scrutinizing or picking at.
That's right --- you can try to analyze, scrutinize, or pick at it --- but then that's where we come in to set you guys straight.
Creationists of course will say that creationism makes sense ...
Yup.
... but only if you believe in magic ...
Nope.
... once you can get your head to believe in magic everything about creationism falls into place ...
I supose so.
...as there's no magic about evolution creationists can not bring themselves to believe it's true.
I don't blame evolution on magic --- that's doing disservice to magicians --- I blame evolution on Satan, the father of lies.

Credit where credit is due.
 
Upvote 0
I don't blame evolution on magic --- that's doing disservice to magicians --- I blame evolution on Satan, the father of lies.

Credit where credit is due.
Religion has a lot to answer for, damaging brains being the most obvious.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,211
52,660
Guam
✟5,154,085.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Religion has a lot to answer for, damaging brains being the most obvious.
No argument there --- and it will answer too --- but to a Higher Authority --- not to atheists.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,211
52,660
Guam
✟5,154,085.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
AV, do you believe in adhering to the Bible in its entirety and literal sense?
Yes.

I believe in adhering to the Bible 100% in whatever sense the passage was written in.

This is known as interpreting It literally --- but, more accurately --- it is known as using the historical-grammatical method of interpretation.

Meaning that It is to be interpreted by putting yourself in the place of the [human] writer.
 
Upvote 0
T

tanzanos

Guest
Yes.

I believe in adhering to the Bible 100% in whatever sense the passage was written in.

This is known as interpreting It literally --- but, more accurately --- it is known as using the historical-grammatical method of interpretation.

Meaning that It is to be interpreted by putting yourself in the place of the [human] writer.

So you agree in killing disobedient children!

Well. Now I know why more people are turning away from religion. We just love our kids too much.:wave:
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,211
52,660
Guam
✟5,154,085.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So you agree in killing disobedient children!

Well. Now I know why more people are turning away from religion. We just love our kids too much.:wave:
You might try turning to DISPENSATION THEOLOGY --- it just might help you with your problem.

(I understand, though --- it's much easier not to --- since that would take some work, and you might have to admit that Theology does require some mental effort after all --- which would make you the laughing-stock of atheists here).
 
  • Like
Reactions: genXer
Upvote 0
T

tanzanos

Guest
You might try turning to DISPENSATION THEOLOGY --- it just might help you with your problem.

(I understand, though --- it's much easier not to --- since that would take some work, and you might have to admit that Theology does require some mental effort after all --- which would make you the laughing-stock of atheists here).

Science requires mental effort. Religion requires unquestioned submission.
I am not the one with a problem.
I fear no god.
I fear no demons.
The only thing I fear are the people who believe in such things!
 
Upvote 0

Gracchus

Senior Veteran
Dec 21, 2002
7,199
821
California
Visit site
✟38,182.00
Faith
Pantheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Yup --- and I've got four departments right here that say evolution can take a hike.

(Following your link: )

AV1611VET said:
Bible Is the Bible against Evolution?
Here are my Four Biblical Refutations Against Evolution:

1. NOT ENOUGH TIME.

The Bible portrays this universe as having been in existence for approximately 6100 years. This is much too short a time for evolution to work.

The Bible is wrong. According to Jesus, Moses, who he says wrote the Torah, got it wrong! (See below.)

2. GOD'S CREATION LEFT NO ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT.

Six times in Genesis 1, God pronounces his Creation "good". Then He steps back and pronounces the whole thing "very good".
Someone wrote that God said it was very good. Later on, though, he wiped almost all of it out in a flood. Sounds like faulty design.

Evolution, on the other hand, demands room for improvement.
Scoring in the 98%tile on the SAT is very good, but there is room for improvement. And, if trilobites were so great, why aren't there any around anymore?

3. THERE WAS NO DEATH IN GENESIS ONE.

* The Bible portrays death as an enemy of God.
* [bible]1 Corinthians 15:26[/bible]
Evolution, on the other hand, works by leaving a trail of death behind.
And yet, everything that lives, dies. Your god is apparently not very effective against his enemies. But then, as H.L. Mencken observed, “God created man in his own image, and man, being a gentleman, returned the compliment.”

4. JESUS TAUGHT CREATION.

[bible]Mark 10:6[/bible]
KJV Mark 10:
"1 And he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan: and the people resort unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again.
2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

He wasn’t teaching about creation, he was teaching about marriage and divorce. And notice, that he is disagreeing with Moses, who he believed wrote the Torah.

[bible]Mark 13:19[/bible]
Jesus takes Genesis One literally --- in fact --- He wrote it.
It was commonly accepted, that Moses wrote the Torah, and Jesus apparently accepted this. Obviously, Jesus didn't think that he wrote it himself. And if he did, then he is saying that he, himself, was wrong to allow divorce. And yet, he says Moses got it wrong! It would seem that Jesus, unlike you AV1611VET, did not even pretend to bow down and worship words on paper.

Theology does require some mental effort after all --- which would make you the laughing-stock of atheists here).

Astrology, phrenology, Tarot reading, and palmistry also require some mental effort. Schizophrenics also must take great trouble to support their delusions. Many things that are hard to believe just aren't so. Difficulty is not evidence of pertinence.


You make all sorts of claims, AV1611VET, based or your singularly quirky interpretation of a collection of texts written over a period of several hundred years, by people living in cultures you don’t understand. And by simple observation, we see that the world does not work as you say it does.

That’s why I can’t take you seriously. Your god is even smaller than you are, and if he doesn't do things your way, he can take a hike!


:wave:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Split Rock
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Evolution can be analysed, scrutinized and picked at in every department,
creationism on the other hand can not, you take creationism for what it is, a story,
you either believe the story or you don't, no analysing, scrutinizing or picking at.

That isn't true. Creationism as far as the narrative of Genesis one can be scrutinized and picked at.

Creationists of course will say that creationism makes sense, but only if you believe in magic,
once you can get your head to believe in magic everything about creationism falls into place,
as there's no magic about evolution creationists can not bring themselves to believe it's true.

Creationism does not necessarily preclude evolutionary processes. Not all Creationists deny evolutionary processes. It just depends what "evolution" means in the whole realm of life.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
evolution fails at the start unless you can accept that something can appear from nothing as an act of nothing with influence from no one.

That is actually Abiogenesis. Regardless, yes you have to have some faith that life came out of nothing without aid of intelligence.
 
Upvote 0

MoonLancer

The Moon is a reflection of the MorningStar
Aug 10, 2007
5,765
166
✟29,524.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
In Relationship
That isn't true. Creationism as far as the narrative of Genesis one can be scrutinized and picked at.

I think what he is saying that creationism as hypothesis isn't testable. Can you show anything that's testable or falsifiable about it? Their have been many opportunities to show evolution wrong, and at every step the fundamentals of evolution have been proven right.

Creationism does not necessarily preclude evolutionary processes. Not all Creationists deny evolutionary processes. It just depends what "evolution" means in the whole realm of life.
I agree. Evolution doesn't say anything about god. I think its up to people to reconcile that themselves. I do think its wrong to teach something without evidence or to exclude something because one doesn't like the evidence and its obvious conclusions.

Really creationists should be more upset with abiogenesis but they have been running a slime job on evolution that switching now would be a waist of 50 or so years.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,211
52,660
Guam
✟5,154,085.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Really creationists should be more upset with abiogenesis but they have been running a slime job on evolution that switching now would be a waist of 50 or so years.
You want to know what's ironic, MoonLancer?

While you guys were frothing at the mouth at us because we couldn't come up with a working definition of KIND --- Pluto reared up and caught you guys off-guard without a definition of PLANET.

And you had to sacrifice that whole planet to save face.
 
Upvote 0

mont974x4

The Christian Anarchist
Site Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
17,630
1,304
Montana, USA
Visit site
✟69,115.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
That is actually Abiogenesis. Regardless, yes you have to have some faith that life came out of nothing without aid of intelligence.

I simply do not have the faith to believe in evolution, whereas creation itself testifies of God's existence
 
Upvote 0

MoonLancer

The Moon is a reflection of the MorningStar
Aug 10, 2007
5,765
166
✟29,524.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
In Relationship
You want to know what's ironic, MoonLancer?

While you guys were frothing at the mouth at us because we couldn't come up with a working definition of KIND --- Pluto reared up and caught you guys off-guard without a definition of PLANET.

And you had to sacrifice that whole planet to save face.

I am hardly frothing. I am quite content to never allow creationsium into schools as long as it remains junk.

Science always had a working definition of planet. It was so specific and preciss that even the erragularity of pluto was suspect. You don't even have a definition of kind that's testable or that can be used to scritnize animls into its own kinds. The dffinition of planet however, and pluto was scritnized to NOT be a planet after it was found out to have more in common with an asteroid..

If science was trying to save face, it wouldn't have bothered to do anything.

Your red herring is noted. It is also noted that you have not provided a testable hypothesis for Creationisum. The definition of planet was a testable definition. After much discovery it was found out that pluto did not meet that definition. It had more in common with an asteroid.

You should thank scientests for banishing hell for you.
 
Upvote 0

MoonLancer

The Moon is a reflection of the MorningStar
Aug 10, 2007
5,765
166
✟29,524.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
In Relationship
evolution fails at the start unless you can accept that something can appear from nothing as an act of nothing with influence from no one.

That would be true, but your attacking a straw man. Your thinking of abiogenesis which is not a theory yet.

In order to show that gravity exists today, does one need to show that how it was created or came about? I guess it poofing into existence invalidates that its here today as a physical phenomena huh?


I simply do not have the faith to believe in evolution, whereas creation itself testifies of God's existence

why because he brands thing like the things humans create? I think you mean that you do not have enough faith to believe in GOD if while accepting evolution as simultaneously true.
 
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
23,117
6,803
72
✟382,587.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Science requires mental effort. Religion requires unquestioned submission.
I am not the one with a problem.
I fear no god.
I fear no demons.
The only thing I fear are the people who believe in such things!

My friend Ahz says you should fear demons.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,211
52,660
Guam
✟5,154,085.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Science always had a working definition of planet.
Uh-huh --- sure they did.
After much discovery it was found out that pluto did not meet that definition. It had more in common with an asteroid.
Is that why the vote was unanimous --- no, wait --- the vote wasn't unanimous.

There are still some scientists in the IAU that disagree with Pluto's reclassification.

Maybe they should come here and talk to you johnny-come-lately astronomers.

This site, as far as I've seen so far, is 100% in favor of the vote - (even though the IAU [and yours truly] isn't).
 
Upvote 0