• 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.

Richard Dawkins Explains Why He Doesn't Debate Young Earth Creationists

Illuminaughty

Drift and Doubt
May 18, 2012
4,617
133
✟28,109.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
kWCrazy: The basic premise of atheism is that there is no God;

Yes.


that we live in a purely physical world where nothing ever happens which does not conform to natural laws
Not necessarily. Atheism implies only a lack of belief in God/s. What you are describing here would be better labeled scientific naturalism. Some atheists are also scientific naturalists but others might not be.
 
Upvote 0

Illuminaughty

Drift and Doubt
May 18, 2012
4,617
133
✟28,109.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
I can see the wisdom in high profile scientists refusing to debate the young earth creationists. Same thing with people who posit a flat earth. Those positions are already completely discredited and not taken seriously among the scientifically literate. Legitimate debate regarding the earth only being 7,000 years old ended over a 100 years ago or so. The earth is older. End of story. To send in a high profile scientist as a debater might give to much publicity to the cause. Also might lead to the young earthers claiming: "See they need their top guns to even try to debunk our air tight case that the world is only 7,000 years old! We have them on the defensive now!" It's also so easy to poke holes in young earth theories that you don't need a scientist for the debate. Any high school science teacher should be able to do it with one hand tied behind their back. If they want a debate just send in someone who isn't a science big shot or famous so as to avoid giving them to much publicity.
 
Upvote 0

Stone Butterfly

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2013
542
29
Godly spirit having a human experience
✟852.00
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
It is impossible to know that no such thing as God exists.

Atheists premise is that what is proposed as that what is currently identified as God by all religions has no evidence supporting its particular existence.

Agnostic Atheism is an absurd title. The Agnostic says, they don't believe there is a God but they're not sure and would be open to proof they are wrong.

"Atheist" and "Atheism" are quite specific according to the Greek etymology that sustains that singular title: No God. A-theos.

Atheist Agnosticism is redundant and an oxymoron. "There is no such thing as God.But I could be wrong". Well, that's Agnosticism. Not atheism and agnosticism combined.

Gnostic Atheism is idiotic. There is no proof God does not exist. The only 'knowledge' an atheist has that convinces them God doesn't exist is their own conclusion based on refuting all that exists can not have arrived by the act of a creative intelligence behind it being responsible.

That conclusion is based on what is taught about what God is in theist circles and the revocation by the atheist of those teachings due to the conclusion they are irrational and unfounded and unproved.
Atheists aren't capable of realizing it is possible that something they can't rationalize would qualify to be titled, God.

Meanwhile, many atheists claim science proves God doesn't exist. But science has yet to arrive at a definitive proof as to why all else does. Ignoring that fact the atheist that aligns with science is happy to dismiss that fact and argue that religion is laughable for claiming a supreme invisible being created everything, while religions can't explain what created God.

Agnostic Atheists, Gnostic Atheists, Atheist Agnostics. ^_^ I LOVE labels that cancel each other out.
 
Upvote 0

Stone Butterfly

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2013
542
29
Godly spirit having a human experience
✟852.00
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Richard Dawkins Interviews Creationist Wendy Wright (Complete) - YouTube

Is there a blond joke award for outstanding patronizing? :eek:

Not only is that woman unqualified to debate Richard Dawkins, but she is the example of hypocrisy when she talks about respect for people while laughing in Dawkins face as he points out how obstinate she is in her blatant stupidity about DNA and the fossil record.

She would look at the human early man fossils at the museum if they were there? :doh: She must only visit the Creationist Museum. That would explain a lot. :lost: "Dinosaur fossils were buried by Satan so as to tempt the Christian from their Biblical faith!"
I can see her arguing that in the next series. But I don't think Dawkins would suffer that.
55.gif
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,792
✟254,941.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Richard Dawkins Interviews Creationist Wendy Wright (Complete) - YouTube

Is there a blond joke award for outstanding patronizing? :eek:

Not only is that woman unqualified to debate Richard Dawkins, but she is the example of hypocrisy when she talks about respect for people while laughing in Dawkins face as he points out how obstinate she is in her blatant stupidity about DNA and the fossil record.

She would look at the human early man fossils at the museum if they were there? :doh: She must only visit the Creationist Museum. That would explain a lot. :lost: "Dinosaur fossils were buried by Satan so as to tempt the Christian from their Biblical faith!"
I can see her arguing that in the next series. But I don't think Dawkins would suffer that.
55.gif

Always be leery of people who fake smile and laugh while making a point.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟98,077.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I can see the wisdom in high profile scientists refusing to debate the young earth creationists. Same thing with people who posit a flat earth.
Why do some people insist on using the most profoundly ignorant arguments? Flat earth? Really? Name one. In all the time I've been online; which has been since the 80's, I've NEVER seen anyone argue for a flat earth. Not once. It's not even a good straw man argument because nobody has believed in it for centuries.

The Bible doesn't speak about a flat earth either, despite the repeated false claims of those who have never read it. It mentions the circle of the earth and says that God hangs the earth on nothing, but other than that it doesn't address cosmology. It's about man's relationship with God, not the planet's relationship with the rest of the universe.

Those positions are already completely discredited and not taken seriously among the scientifically literate.
Beat that straw man! Beat that straw man! You just might impress yourself.
Legitimate debate regarding the earth only being 7,000 years old ended over a 100 years ago or so.
False. The genealogies of the Bible say otherwise. You don't get to say what is legitimate or not That's for each person to decide themselves. There is only one Lord of the universe, and I'm pretty sure it isn't you.
The earth is older. End of story.
I reject your opinion. End of story.
Also might lead to the young earthers claiming: "See they need their top guns to even try to debunk our air tight case that the world is only 7,000 years old!

You LOOOOVE your straw men, don't you? Tell you what. After this I won't address you. You can give both sides of the argument and pretend you won.
 
Upvote 0

Stone Butterfly

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2013
542
29
Godly spirit having a human experience
✟852.00
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Always be leery of people who fake smile and laugh while making a point.
That was sickening. And the tone of her laughter as well. She talked about the difference between her kind, not reflective of other Christians to say the least, and evolutionists was having love and respect for people. And then she does nothing but show contempt and mockery for Dawkins. Who's a people too. ;)
And the parroting! Regardless of how Dawkins refuted her ignorant assertions, she kept parroting the same erroneous drivel.
An hour long debate. Standing up. How could he stand it?

I'd hope she'd be embarrassed by her display if she came upon this video. But I doubt it.
 
Upvote 0

Paradoxum

Liberty, Equality, Solidarity!
Sep 16, 2011
10,712
654
✟43,188.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Let me ask you this.

Suppose I offered you an all expenses paid week to a fabulous resort with everything you could imaging provided for you for only five grand. Would that be a bargain?

Suppose I went further and offered to sell you a mansion at the resort. It would only cost a hundred grand, and it came with a full staff to provide you with everything you needed all included. Would that be a steal?

Suppose I went even further and offered you the kingdom of Heaven for all eternity. Would that not be worth billions, even trillions of dollars? What if I offered it to you for free and all you had to do was accept it? Would you?

What would you think if someone rejected such an offer?


Five grand is quite alot, to me anyway. :p

But sure, if you offered me that, and all I had to do was accept, then I'd say yes. I'm not sure you are in the position to offer me a mansion though, and I'd very skeptical that this heaven you are offering me is real.

I wouldn't accept your offer, and I'd accept God's offer.

The Bible says that anyone who denies the existence of God is a fool. Why? Because the evidence is all around us. We might not have lived in a time when we could see His great miracles, but miracles still happen; mostly on a lesser scale. Actually, the Bible talks about fools quite often. In Proverbs 14, we read: "Leave the presence of a fool, for there you do not meet words of knowledge. The wisdom of the prudent is to discern his way, but the folly of fools is deceiving." The fool is the one who rejects God; who rejects wisdom. Understanding this, it is not name calling to reference such Scriptural admonitions. Rather it puts things into perspective. Atheists are nothing new and nothing special. They've been around for a long, long time. There is not wisdom in their rejection of God; only folly in their belief that somehow everything came from nothing and nothing was designed.

I don't see this evidence all around us. I know there are claims of miracles now. I've met people who claim they were healed. I haven't been able to ask them about it much though. The thing is I don't find the claims of miracles to be justified with enough evidence. There can be other explanations.

Personally, I'm not sure everything came from nothing. I don't claim to understand the beginning of the universe, but it could have come from a timeless something.

People can claim through ignorance that miracles have happened when they have not. In fact, most are merely incredible co-incidences. Sometimes they are statistically improbable, but some actually do defy the laws of physics and other natural laws.

I haven't seen enough evidence for such miracles, and I come from a charismatic church, that is into healings and stuff like that.

Exactly; but that number was small and probably consisted of non believers. I think what happened was a vision; a sign if you prefer. I don't think the sun was actually doing acrobatics. I think it was an actual vision that had far too many witnesses to be mass hysteria. That some didn't see it actually makes it more of a miracle.

Well it said that some believers saw nothing. Also, wouldn't it make sense for God to do a miracle for non-believers anyway?

If it was a vision, it could have been the product of the mind. eg: One explanation in the wiki was that people were looking at the Sun too long, and that could have messed with their sight for a while.

I'm not trying to take away your faith. You brought these things up, and I'm just replying. :D

Neither does anyone else. They defy all known scientific processes, and seem to be limited to saints.

I'm quite happy to say I don't know. I don't think it is impossible for a body to be preserved for a strangely long amount of time.

Not really. fossilization can be recreated in a lab. incorruptible flesh cannot.

Sure, but if we don't know why it happens it would be hard to copy.

The witnesses are pretty emphatic. From the size of the woman who was pulled out, there is NO WAY she could fit through a 8" gap without some physical laws getting pushed aside.

We have no idea how large the gap was. They say it was 8", but that doesn't mean it was that small. That doesn't mean they were lying, but that the might not have looked at it properly because it was an intense situation, or they might remember it incorrectly.

That's why they never report seeing the same thing unless they witnesses an actual event, and even then they see from their own perspective. That's why it takes several witnesses to convict a person of a crime.

Sure.

I would doubt that claim very seriously. Their god can't even manage his diet. (Hey, come on. That was funny.)

I don't understand the joke. :p

Here, we both doubt what happened, but I wouldn't claim they were necessarily lying. I simply don't know what happened.

That one I understand. It's called False Memory Syndrome.

People's minds can do strange things.

Not true. You'll find that among people who major in physical science or biology because they have evolution drummed into their heads on a daily basis. If you don;t agree that the earth is 4.5 billion years old you WILL get points off for missing that question. Professors don't teach the truth. They teach their version of truth. To get good grades, you need to either agree with them or be VERY GOOD and validating your position.

I had a sociology professor who was very liberal. We never agreed on anything, but I got a 4.0 in his class.

Evolution has nothing to do with whether God exists. Lots of Christians believe in God and accept evolution.

Faulty logic; confusing coincidence with cause. That religious visions can be replicated under controlled circumstances does not mean that all religious visions are psychologically induced.

I agree. I didn't use that logic. But is religious feelings can be just psychological, and we know how they were psychologically, then there is no strong reason to think there is a God doing it.

Sorry, I don't believe you. I think you're lying to yourself. I think you know what you felt then and you wish you felt it now, but things have happened in your life that have led you away from God and now He seems too distant to be real.


What do you think happened to me? Nothing bad happened to me.

We live in a world populated by an increasingly godless society and every vestige of decency is under assault. It may seem like if there was a God that He's put an end to it. He will. Re-read the Revelation. Things will get much worse than they are now, but eventually the end WILL come. I believe it will happen in my lifetime. I may be wrong, but everything that was prophesied including the return to Jerusalem and the armies of Israel swarming around them has come to pass. Jesus said that nobody will pluck you from His hand. That means that sooner or later you'll have no place left to turn than to Him. You already know something that atheists don't know and refuse to allow themselves to believe; that God is real. You've experience His presence. That is NOT something you forget. Having dinner with a movie star or king is nothing compared to meeting the Father. You can continue to deny it all you want, but once you know the truth you can't go back to not knowing.

It's easy to find Him though. he stands at the door and knocks. All you have to do is open up and let Him in again.

Maybe there is a God, but he hasn't made himself very clear. So far it seems like God is something humans made up. It would be nice if there were a good God, but I don't see enough reason to believe.

:)
 
Upvote 0

Stone Butterfly

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2013
542
29
Godly spirit having a human experience
✟852.00
Faith
Nazarene
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Maybe there is a God, but he hasn't made himself very clear. So far it seems like God is something humans made up. It would be nice if there were a good God, but I don't see enough reason to believe.

:)
I agree with KW. You're not making any sense and are actually contradicting your own statements. You claimed you use to have a relationship with God and God spoke to you? And now you say that?
Something sure happened to make you do a convoluted 180. Especially when I've read you to say in other threads that you don't believe in morality, and are all for incest because when it's between consenting individuals.

So, hows that lack of belief working out for you?
 
Upvote 0

TheQuietRiot

indomitable
Aug 17, 2011
1,583
330
West Yorkshire
✟27,002.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Why do some people insist on using the most profoundly ignorant arguments? Flat earth? Really? Name one. In all the time I've been online; which has been since the 80's, I've NEVER seen anyone argue for a flat earth. Not once. It's not even a good straw man argument because nobody has believed in it for centuries.

The Bible doesn't speak about a flat earth either, despite the repeated false claims of those who have never read it. It mentions the circle of the earth and says that God hangs the earth on nothing, but other than that it doesn't address cosmology. It's about man's relationship with God, not the planet's relationship with the rest of the universe.

I'm afraid that you haven't looked hard enough then.

Flat Earth Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Upvote 0

TheQuietRiot

indomitable
Aug 17, 2011
1,583
330
West Yorkshire
✟27,002.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Atheists attack us for believing in something we can't prove, but they do exactly the same thing because they can't prove the non existence of God. If they simply don't know, then they're not an atheist, they're an agnostic. An atheist is someone who KNOWS there is no God. In other words, he "knows absolutely" something which cannot be proved absolutely that nearly any Christian can refute by personal experience. That's not exactly my definition of intelligence.

I am an atheist, but I don't know there is no god. I just see no good reason for believing in one.

But you are an atheist in respect to the fact that you don't believe in the thousands of other gods that mankind has worshiped in the past and present day. I have just taken it one step (and one god) further than you have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archaeopteryx
Upvote 0

Lord Emsworth

Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves.
Oct 10, 2004
51,745
421
Through the cables and the underground ...
✟76,459.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Gnostic Atheism is idiotic. There is no proof God does not exist. The only 'knowledge' an atheist has that convinces them God doesn't exist is their own conclusion based on refuting all that exists can not have arrived by the act of a creative intelligence behind it being responsible.

That conclusion is based on what is taught about what God is in theist circles and the revocation by the atheist of those teachings due to the conclusion they are irrational and unfounded and unproved.
Atheists aren't capable of realizing it is possible that something they can't rationalize would qualify to be titled, God.

What is this to you? Some game? If God is not roughly what people believe it is and define it as, then all I can say is:
"Not only is the idea that God exists not true, it is not even false." IOW it is even worse that just being wrong.

In addition to that ... If all the theists in the world talk rot about God it is not the atheists' fault.
 
Upvote 0

Illuminaughty

Drift and Doubt
May 18, 2012
4,617
133
✟28,109.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Why do some people insist on using the most profoundly ignorant arguments? Flat earth?
I'm not the one arguing that the earth is only 7,000 years old, despite all evidence to the contrary, simply because I looked to an ancient religious text, added the ages of the people presented in a genealogy together and came to that figure. Young earth is certainly in the same realm of debunked pseudo-science as flat earth. And yes there are people who argue for a flat earth. Not to long ago I was reading about a Muslim fundamentalist who was making the flat earth argument using Koranic verses for support.

The Bible doesn't speak about a flat earth either, despite the repeated false claims of those who have never read it.
I wasn't making the claim that it did or didn't. The points in my above post do not rest on either being the case. There are statements that seem to imply a flat earth. Statements about the corners of the earth and angels holding them up and such but certainly those could be chalked up to poetic license if you so desire. In the same way the Bible doesn't explicitly say "the earth is 7,000 years old " either though.
Beat that straw man! Beat that straw man! You just might impress yourself.
I think you are confusing "dead horse" with "straw man". The "scientific" argument for the earth only being 7,000 years old has long been discredited and is now a dead horse. Why? Probably because It was never a scientific theory in the first place and was never able to stand up to scrutiny. It was a theory created via the adding of some numbers found in the Bible together. Then some people went out and tried to shoe horn some "evidence" to prove the conclusion they already had while trying to put doubt of nearly every finding of Geology and the other sciences involved. Go, confirmation bias.

False. The genealogies of the Bible say otherwise. You don't get to say what is legitimate or not That's for each person to decide themselves. There is only one Lord of the universe, and I'm pretty sure it isn't you.
What makes you think that adding together some numbers found in Biblical genealogies would be the correct method to go about finding the age of the earth. One would think all the physical evidence pointing in the opposite direction would make you revise your assumption as to it's usefulness in judging the earths age. Maybe God didn't put those genealogies in the Bible** as a means for you to judge the age of the earth? Seems a lot of Christians would agree with that possibility because young earth doesn't seem to be the majority view among Christians by a long shot.

I reject your opinion. End of story.
That won't change the fact that the earth has been around longer than 7000 years.

**assuming for the sake of discussion he exists and inspired the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟98,077.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm afraid that you haven't looked hard enough then.
No, they don't post on this forum. They CERTAINLY don't represent mainstream Christianity or mainstream anything for that matter. It's still a false accusation and a straw man argument. The only people I've ever seen even mentioning a flat earth is dishonest atheists who construct straw men.
 
Upvote 0

Lord Emsworth

Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves.
Oct 10, 2004
51,745
421
Through the cables and the underground ...
✟76,459.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Why do some people insist on using the most profoundly ignorant arguments? Flat earth? Really? Name one. In all the time I've been online; which has been since the 80's, I've NEVER seen anyone argue for a flat earth. Not once. It's not even a good straw man argument because nobody has believed in it for centuries.


Almost nobody. ;)

"Four Hundred Passages in the Bible that Condemn the Globe Theory, or the Flying Earth, and None Sustain It.
This Map is the Bible Map of the World."

1024px-Orlando-Ferguson-flat-earth-map_edit.jpg

Taken from here:
Flat Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also interesting:
English writer Samuel Rowbotham (1816–1885), writing under the pseudonym "Parallax," produced a pamphlet called Zetetic Astronomy in 1849 arguing for a flat Earth and published results of many experiments that tested the curvatures of water over a long drainage ditch, followed by another called The inconsistency of Modern Astronomy and its Opposition to the Scripture. One of his supporters, John Hampden, lost a bet to Alfred Russel Wallace in the famous Bedford Level Experiment, which attempted to prove it. In 1877 Hampden produced a book called "A New Manual of Biblical Cosmography".​

I can't help it, but there does seem to be a heavy religious compenent in all of these people's outlook.
 
Upvote 0

Illuminaughty

Drift and Doubt
May 18, 2012
4,617
133
✟28,109.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
They CERTAINLY don't represent mainstream Christianity
Neither does young earth. As a Christian I was involved in a number of mainstream denominations ( Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Roman Catholic, Russian Orthodox, and the United Methodist Church) and not a single one of them pushed the idea that the earth was only 7,000 years old. This is something pretty much limited to the real fringe fundamentalist wing at least in this day an age. Sure it might have been mainstream back int he dark ages but not now.
 
Upvote 0

Dusky Mouse

Cats Are In Charge ~ Accept It!
Sep 25, 2013
1,830
114
Adelaide S.Australia
✟2,598.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Almost nobody. ;)

"Four Hundred Passages in the Bible that Condemn the Globe Theory, or the Flying Earth, and None Sustain It.
This Map is the Bible Map of the World."

1024px-Orlando-Ferguson-flat-earth-map_edit.jpg

Taken from here:
Flat Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also interesting:
English writer Samuel Rowbotham (1816–1885), writing under the pseudonym "Parallax," produced a pamphlet called Zetetic Astronomy in 1849 arguing for a flat Earth and published results of many experiments that tested the curvatures of water over a long drainage ditch, followed by another called The inconsistency of Modern Astronomy and its Opposition to the Scripture. One of his supporters, John Hampden, lost a bet to Alfred Russel Wallace in the famous Bedford Level Experiment, which attempted to prove it. In 1877 Hampden produced a book called "A New Manual of Biblical Cosmography".​
I can't help it, but there does seem to be a heavy religious compenent in all of these people's outlook.
I'd like to have that geocentric diagram for framing.



Neither does young earth. As a Christian I was involved in a number of mainstream denominations ( Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Roman Catholic, Russian Orthodox, and the United Methodist Church) and not a single one of them pushed the idea that the earth was only 7,000 years old. This is something pretty much limited to the real fringe fundamentalist wing at least in this day an age. Sure it might have been mainstream back int he dark ages but not now.
I've never known a Christian who believes in young earth either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Illuminaughty
Upvote 0

Lord Emsworth

Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves.
Oct 10, 2004
51,745
421
Through the cables and the underground ...
✟76,459.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0