...Do you even believe in Evolution in the first palce?

[BarryDesborough]

I'm quite serious about this. If you decide God meant all the words of the Bible to be interpreted literally, then everything else follows rationally from there, no matter how much the results contradict apparent reality.
.
You can do this with any book, if you decide to.
.

Everything appears to follow rationally from there. That is the trap of confirmation bias.

 

[In situ]

I'm quite serious about this. If you decide God meant all the words of the Bible to be interpreted literally, then everything else follows rationally from there, no matter how much the results contradict apparent reality.
.
You can do this with any book, if you decide to.
.

I agree it is an contributing factor, and in many cases that may just be the case, but what you say is not true in all cases. As I see it, the bias in your statement is that of an over generalization.

 

[In situ]

appears ... rationally

Then we agree, as you say they think their view is rational for their point of view...just as I think my view is rational from my point of view. (I am not saying I bases my view on the same reasons, nor that both views in fact are rational, but that both views apears to be rational from an internal perspective).

 

[Mr Clean]

Been there / done that ... thanks to Frumious Bandersnatch: 2

I appreciate the offer, though ...
`

Yeah...that has nothing to do with Gen 1. But since holding a discussion with myself would be weird, we will move on. Thanks for replying, I do appreciate it.

 

[Mr Clean]

You think miracles should be verifiable 2500 years after the fact?

You don't? I think any claim of the supernatural variety should be verified. How about verifying one of the miracles that people claim happened this year, or last year? Let's start with the verification of one miracle, and then we can talk about 2500 years ago...

 

[Mr Clean]

Wait until you see these:

Angiosperms before the sun, and angiosperms before insects!

How are those for funny?

The only funny thing I see is your failure to give more informatin about whales existing before land animals. Did you play hockey? Because you sure are good at deflecting...

 

[Mr Clean]

NO. I think miracles neednt be verified. If a miracle happened to you,you should tell it to others. You shouldnt verify it even when others don't believe it.

There is a toaster flying in orbit around Mars. Did you know that?

It's a miracle it got there, and I'm telling you about it now. Don't worry about verifying it, since I told you about the toaster you should just go ahead and accept that...

 

[Mr Clean]

Would you like to read the personal testimonies of people who have experienced miracles? You don't need a 2,000 year old book. You need look no further than this forum.

Miracles, it seems, are not particularly rare. They are difficult to prove because they don't leave physical evidence. That doesn't make them any less real.

For some reason atheists seem to wear their disbelief as a crown of enlightenment. David called them fools in Psalms 14:1. They live in a world surrounded by evidence of God's majesty and yet they refuse to see it. Denying God doesn't make Him less real any more than closing your eyes makes it nighttime. You are surrounded by people who have seen to them proof of what you deny. When you continue to deny the God that we know, it makes you seem as foolish as someone who doesn't believe in oceans because he's never seen one personally.

Read the personal testimonies.... if you dare.

I read some of them. I "dared". I saw nothing of value.

Now I dare you to read them from the perspective of someone that is an athiest. Read them from a scientific point of view and see if you can understand how silly and irrational they sound. See if you can understand how the human mind, which is programmed to find patterns out of randomness, could take any story presented in there and create a connection that does not really exist. Let's see if you can do that...

By the way, do you think some of them are lying?

 

[Mr Clean]

1. These people are members here.
2. These are personal and eyewitness accounts.
3. A true scientist explores. A coward hides from the truth.

1) That is a credential? There's no chance that some lonely person with nothing better to do could make up some testimonial just to feel included?
2) Which are unverifiable. We don't even know if they believe what they are saying.
3) Truth means to be in accordance of fact. What facts are presented? None. Science has done its work already...

The worldwide flood never happened. The bible is wrong. Care to explore the truth of that?

 

[Mr Clean]

It's not funny to me.

What difference does it make how much evidence is behind an idea before it becomes a theory?

How much evidence is behind the moon's Capture Theory?

A theory is a theory.

And for the record, and not to sound like a broken one, but Aristotle stunted the growth of science for almost 2000 years with his theory about earth, air, fire and water.

He almost has the Bible beat in the stunting the growth of science department, doesn't he.... But science got past his mistakes. Believers? Still waiting for the corrections to start there...

 

[AV1611VET]

You don't? I think any claim of the supernatural variety should be verified. How about verifying one of the miracles that people claim happened this year, or last year? Let's start with the verification of one miracle, and then we can talk about 2500 years ago...

Let's not.

Jesus spoke of your kind ...

Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

... and I'm not going to waste my time.

 

[CabVet]

Let's not.

Jesus spoke of your kind ...

Luke 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

... and I'm not going to waste my time.

Oh, so you have to believe before you are able believe. Good to know. Since the default position is not believing, all mission work by all Christian churches should stop, too bad they don't agree with your interpretation and waste so much time.

 

[AV1611VET]

The only funny thing I see is your failure to give more informatin about whales existing before land animals.

1 comes before 2 -- how much more information do you need?

I comes before E (except after C) -- what letter don't you understand?

2008 comes before 2013, chief.

Whales came before land animals in Genesis 1.

What information are you lacking?

Did you play hockey?

Once your newbieness wears off, you'll see that the favorite game of choice around here is Arab phone (Chinese whispers, the Telephone game).

Get ready to play it, if you're planning to be here any length of time.

Because you sure are good at deflecting...

... Flattery will get you nowhere.

 

[Mariposa36]

I don't believe evolution is a perfect theory, yet I recognize that some parts of it are true and can exist alongside creation. Because of this, I believe in theistic evolution.

 

[pjnlsn]

1 comes before 2 -- how much more information do you need?

I comes before E (except after C) -- what letter don't you understand?

2008 comes before 2013, chief.

Whales came before land animals in Genesis 1.

What information are you lacking?

Once your newbieness wears off, you'll see that the favorite game of choice around here is Arab phone (Chinese whispers, the Telephone game).

Get ready to play it, if you're planning to be here any length of time.

... Flattery will get you nowhere.

The Bible need not be true. It is unlikely and unproven that a deity, of Christianity or otherwise, exists.

 

[Loudmouth]

I don't believe evolution is a perfect theory, yet I recognize that some parts of it are true and can exist alongside creation. Because of this, I believe in theistic evolution.

I have always been curious why this doesn't extend to all theories, from a theological perspective. Why not theistic chemistry, or theist relativity? Why would God's interaction with nature be limited to evolution?

 

[pjnlsn]

I don't believe evolution is a perfect theory, yet I recognize that some parts of it are true and can exist alongside creation. Because of this, I believe in theistic evolution.

It's far more likely, in many ways, and more complete, than that a deity exists.

The existence of any deity is unlikely and unproven.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Bible need not be true. It is unlikely and unproven that a deity, of Christianity or otherwise, exists.

That's your frewill to believe that if you want to; but whether you think It's true or not, I don't think you can deny It documents whales before land animals.

You can deny it in reality, but denying the Bible says it is another thing.

As I'm fond of pointing out -- people can claim anything they want about the Bible, but they can't deny It says what It says.

I can deny Humpty Dumpty ever existed, but I can't deny that Samuel Arnold's documentation says he sat on a wall and had a great fall.

 

[pjnlsn]

That's your frewill to believe that if you want to; but whether you think It's true or not, I don't think you can deny It documents whales before land animals.

You can deny it in reality, but denying the Bible says it is another thing.

As I'm fond of pointing out -- people can claim anything they want about the Bible, but they can't deny It says what It says.

I can deny Humpty Dumpty ever existed, but I can't deny that Samuel Arnold's documentation says he sat on a wall and had a great fall.

That it says it does not make it true.

 

[CabVet]

That's your frewill to believe that if you want to; but whether you think It's true or not, I don't think you can deny It documents whales before land animals.

You can deny it in reality, but denying the Bible says it is another thing.

As I'm fond of pointing out -- people can claim anything they want about the Bible, but they can't deny It says what It says.

Of course they can deny it since apparently the Bible says something different for every person.