How much longer?

[DerelictJunction]

Quote an evolutionary scientist who is between 5'5" and 6', has brown hair and blue eyes and walks with a slight limp. Can't do it?? Ha, told ya!!

Meanwhile......

"What are we? We are bags of chemicals with relatively uncertain futures. I choose to believe that I do have free will. And, although some decisions that I am confronted with are stressful, I am thankful for them, because they define who I am. "

http://theengineerspulse.blogspot.com/2011/05/are-we-just-bags-of-chemicals.html
​

"Anthony Cashmore is a plant biologist who describes animals, including human beings, as a "bag of chemicals" entirely determined by the laws of physics and chemistry. He says, "we live in an era when few biologists would question the idea that biological systems are totally based on the laws of physics and chemistry."

http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/cashmore/

​

Are we to assume that you believe humans to be more than just bags of chemicals? If so, explain.

I missed it....which one of those people said we are merely a bag of chemicals? Saying we are a bag of chemicals is an accurate statement if describing our bodies. However, neither quote contains the words merely or only, now do they?
You specifically stated that the conclusion of Darwinism is that we are merely a bag of chemicals. So far you have not shown any evidence this statement is a conclusion drawn by evolutionary scientists.

Perhaps you are having a problem with reading comprehension.

 

[justlookinla]

I missed it....which one of those people said we are merely a bag of chemicals? Saying we are a bag of chemicals is an accurate statement if describing our bodies. However, neither quote contains the words merely or only, now do they?
You specifically stated that the conclusion of Darwinism is that we are merely a bag of chemicals. So far you have not shown any evidence this statement is a conclusion drawn by evolutionary scientists.

Perhaps you are having a problem with reading comprehension.

Ah, no merely or only, we're just a bag of chemicals?

 

[AV1611VET]

What do you think?

I think we're gestalts.

Our whole is greater than the sum of our parts.

Do you have a picture of the Periodic Table of the Elements in your family album, by any chance?

 

[DerelictJunction]

Ah, no merely or only, we're just a bag of chemicals?

You don't get much out of novels or poetry, do you.

In the English language, there is a distinct difference between "we are a bag of chemicals" and "we are merely a bag of chemicals". That you don't know this, is troubling and must make it very difficult for you to follow normal conversation.

 

[justlookinla]

You don't get much out of novels or poetry, do you.

In the English language, there is a distinct difference between "we are a bag of chemicals" and "we are merely a bag of chemicals". That you don't know this, is troubling and must make it very difficult for you to follow normal conversation.

If you believe we're more than a bag of chemicals, explain why. If not, "merely" is appropriate in describing the life form whether used implicitly or explicitly.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

I've clearly presented the conclusions of Darwinist evolution. If you disagree with those conclusions, simply point out the areas of disagreement.

No, you've clearly represented your veiws of what you think other people are because they don't believe in God. This is assumptive and prejudical. I've said this iver and over and you've tried to wiggle out of it so many times it's pathetic. People don't have to count their relivancy by that which they beleve. It is what they do as people.

I know Christian's that go to church every Sunday, but are the nastiest, self rightious hyprocrites on Gods green Earth.

Point out the what you believe my intent is and how it's wrong.

Why don't you look back at every post that I've stated what you are doing, as well as my statement above. I'm not going to repeat myself a 4th or 5th time when up untill now you've sidestepped everything I've said.

The conclusions of Darwinist evolution concerning the process whereby a human is produced yields a life form which is nothing more than a sack of chemicals, like it or not.

No it is not. That's your conclustion because you place emphisis on the someone's ideals. God created us all the same way and it doesn't matter if we belive in him or not. Your believe system does not change the makeup of who you are.

That's nothing but religious bigotry. "Oh I'm better than you because your belief system rejects God and mine don't so I'm going to go out of my way to condemn that belief system", Where in scripture does it give you the right to chastize others for what they believe? We are hear to spread the word not stick our fingers in other peoples faces.

This is all about you being self rightious and being the center of all this to give you the glory of snearing at others. This has nothing to do with God or Christ. It's all about you! That's what I have a problem with, so pat yourself on your back and tell yourself how great a Christian you are for stepping up here and acting as if it were your job do denuance anyone.

We as Christian's denaunce the actions of the world by not doing them. We are not the world's police. Not now and not every. The wickidness of the world is christ's to clean up. Why would he say Vengence is mine, if that were not the case?

 

[DerelictJunction]

If you believe we're more than a bag of chemicals, explain why. If not, "merely" is appropriate in describing the life form whether used implicitly or explicitly.

We have consciousness, which eliminates the mere even if that consciousness stems from the electro-chemical reactions in our brain.

What I believe is irrelevant to the fact that you still cannot show evidence that the conclusion of Darwinism is that we are "merely a bag of chemicals".

 

[justlookinla]

No, you've clearly represented your veiws of what you think other people are because they don't believe in God. This is assumptive and prejudical. I've said this iver and over and you've tried to wiggle out of it so many times it's pathetic. People don't have to count their relivancy by that which they beleve. It is what they do as people.

We do as people dependent on what we believe. Darwinism results in the view that humans are simply bags of chemcials produced by a random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanism. If one embraces Darwinism and believe themselves to be more than that, they then have a problem with Darwinism.

I know Christian's that go to church every Sunday, but are the nastiest, self rightious hyprocrites on Gods green Earth.

Not pertinent to the conversation.

Why don't you look back at every post that I've stated what you are doing, as well as my statement above. I'm not going to repeat myself a 4th or 5th time when up untill now you've sidestepped everything I've said.

I've directly and completely addressed everything you said.

No it is not. That's your conclustion because you place emphisis on the someone's ideals. God created us all the same way and it doesn't matter if we belive in him or not. Your believe system does not change the makeup of who you are.

One's belief system determines one's worldview. Darwinism produces certain worldviews, theistic beliefs produce others.

That's nothing but religious bigotry. "Oh I'm better than you because your belief system rejects God and mine don't so I'm going to go out of my way to condemn that belief system", Where in scripture does it give you the right to chastize others for what they believe? We are hear to spread the word not stick our fingers in other peoples faces.

The Word indicates that those who reject the creator are going to have problems at a judgement that coming.

This is all about you being self rightious and being the center of all this to give you the glory of snearing at others. This has nothing to do with God or Christ. It's all about you! That's what I have a problem with, so pat yourself on your back and tell yourself how great a Christian you are for stepping up here and acting as if it were your job do denuance anyone.

I certainly denounce the Godless message of Darwinism. It's a soul destroyer.

We as Christian's denaunce the actions of the world by not doing them. We are not the world's police. Not now and not every. The wickidness of the world is christ's to clean up. Why would he say Vengence is mine, if that were not the case?

Why would He say that we're the light of the world? Darwinism isn't light, it's darkness.

 

[justlookinla]

We have consciousness, which eliminates the mere even if that consciousness stems from the electro-chemical reactions in our brain.

That would still be 'mere'. The sack of chemical reactions does't make the sack any less of a sack with the illusion of self.

What I believe is irrelevant to the fact that you still cannot show evidence that the conclusion of Darwinism is that we are "merely a bag of chemicals".

In Darwinism, we're products of arrangements of chemicals which were arranged by a random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanism. If you believe Darwinism produces more than that, please indicate why.

 

[DDan]

In Darwinism, we're products of arrangements of chemicals which were arranged by a random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanism. If you believe Darwinism produces more than that, please indicate why.

If we imagine Gods do we somehow stop being bags of chemicals and become something more? how does that work?
Just because we can imagine Gods does not mean there are Gods or if we imagine we have a soul we don't magically aquire a soul, everything we imagine disappears when our brains shut down and we stop imagining.

 

[justlookinla]

If we imagine Gods do we somehow stop being bags of chemicals and become something more? how does that work?
Just because we can imagine Gods does not mean there are Gods or if we imagine we have a soul we don't magically aquire a soul, everything we imagine disappears when our brains shut down and we stop imagining.

I agree, everything we imagine disappears when our brains shut down. If our existence as a person is simply an illusion created by a certain construct of our brain through a random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless process, (Darwinist evolution view), then all of our actions are simply chemical reactions. Morality, immorality, love, empthay...etc....doesn't really exist no more than we exist. It's all because of some evolved behavior, predetermined 'programming'.

On the other hand, if we're more than that, one must find the source for one's existence. The source would have to be outside 'us', would have to be supernatural. Finding that supernatural source is what billions have claimed to have found.

It's up to each individual to determine who they are, simply a bag of chemicals with only chemical reactions being the determinate concerning their existence or are they more than that? Is there something outside themselves which determines who they are.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

We do as people dependent on what we believe. Darwinism results in the view that humans are simply bags of chemicals produced by a random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanism. If one embraces Darwinism and believe themselves to be more than that, they then have a problem with Darwinism.

We do as our conscience dictates us to do within the perimeters of our morals and ethics. Darwinism results in the idea that god didn't create human beings. You are the one who is stating that it rejects the creation of the conscience mind and what is coined as the soul. Some people have different names for this then we but, I have never heard any Atheist reject that there is, to them the inner working of the essence of life.

Not pertinent to the conversation

My rear end. It has everything to do with what is being talked about because it has to do with what people do with their soul. Why should we automatically get a pass for believing that God gave us a soul if we misuse that which God gave us. It is not our property and if we believe in God and not use what he has given us properly we are worse than any who have ever rejected him.

I've directly and completely addressed everything you said.

False. You've sidestepped and rejected every time I described what youve done. there was a few instances where you responded to that which I never asked as well.

One's belief system determines one's worldview. Darwinism produces certain worldviews, theistic beliefs produce others.

Darwinism sets the starting point, not the journey. A persons world view is much broader than where we began. If anything it changes who and what they acknowledges as the the force behind our being.
They have evidence and we have a book. Where would you go, if you were on the fence? That question right there is the one that keeps me up at night.

The Word indicates that those who reject the creator are going to have problems at a judgement that coming

And that is their choice. It is our choice in how we represent ourselves and it is primarily that which is our greatest asset. The media will never give us a break so we need to follow the message of love, not the message of desperately attempting to save everyone in spite of themselves. We can't drag people into our faith. We need to show them the benefits of it by showing what it does for us.

I certainly denounce the Godless message of Darwinism. It's a soul destroyer

It is nothing but a whisper and has no effect on anyone that would have rejected God even if the theory of evolution had never been thought of. Do you think that Evolution is the only issue that distracts others?

Why would He say that we're the light of the world? Darwinism isn't light, it's darkness.

Satan is darkness. Darwinism is confusion, just as creationism is to those who believe in evolution. When you say we are the light it brings up the idea of how we go about illuminating the world. Christ showed us how to preach his gospel and gave us the perimeters in which we are to stay.

How many who call themselves Christian who has ignored those perimeters to gain the accolades of other Christians who are just as human as you and I.

This is not reality T.V. this is reality and should be addresses accordingly.

 

[justlookinla]

We do as our conscience dictates us to do within the parimeters of our morals and ethics.

In Darwinism, our conscience is nothing more than an evolutionary construct of an arrangement of chemicals producing chemical reactions producing actions we label morals and ethics. There's really no morals or ethics other than the illusion produced in the humanoid of Darwinist evolution.

Darwinism results in the idea that god didn't create human beings.

Darwinism results in the idea that all life we observed today wasn't created by God.

You are the one who is stating that it rejects the creation of the conscience mind and what is coined as the soul.

No, Darwinism results in the explanation for the presence of consciousness. It speaks nothing of the supernatural soul.

Some people have different names for this then we but, I have never heard any Athiest reject that there is, to them the inner working of the essence of life.

I'd be interested in hearing this from an atheist.

My rear end. It has everything to do with what is being talked about because it has to do with what people do with their soul. Why should we automaticaly get a pass for believing that God gave us a sould if we missuse that which God gave us.

A soul doesn't exist in Darwinist creationism.

False. You've sidestepped and rejected every time I described what youve done. there vwas a few instances where you responded to that which I never asked as well.

If you point out what I've sidestepped?

Darwinism sets the starting point, not the journey.

You're completely wrong. Darwinism teaches that the journey was only by naturalistic mechanisms. If we examine these mechanisms we find that they're random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless. And importantly, the journey which produced humans from an alleged single life form of long ago isn't supported by the scientific method.

A persons world veiw is much broader than where we begain. If anything it changes who and what they acknowledges as the the force behind our being.
They have evidence and we have a book. Where would you go, if you were on the fence? That question right there is the one that keeps me up at night.

I would go to the fact that we're more than a sack of chemicals, the product of random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanisms.

And that is their choice. It is our choice in how we represent ourselves and it is primarily that which is our greatest asset. The media will never give us a break so we need to follow the message of love, not the message of desperatly attmpting to save everyone in spite of themselves. We can't drag people into our faith. We need to show them the benefits of it by showing what it does for us.

I'm all for the message of love, mercy, long-suffering, but let's not stop there. There's also judgment and punishment.

It is nothing but a whisper and has no effect on anyone that would have rejected God even if the theory of evolution had never been thought of. Do you think that Evoluton the only issue that distracts others?

No, I don't think that.

Darwinism is confusion, just as creationism is to those who believe in evolution. When you say we are the light it brings up the idea of how we go about illuminating the world. Christ showed us how to preach his gospel and gave us the parimeters in which we are to stay.

Christ was the epitome of light. In His light existence He promoted righteousness and condemned unrighteousness.

How many who call themselves Christian who has ignored those parimeters to gain the acolades of other Christians who are just as human as you and I.

Yes, we're all human and flawed.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

In Darwinism, our conscience is nothing more than an evolutionary construct of an arrangement of chemicals producing chemical reactions producing actions we label morals and ethics. There's really no morals or ethics other than the illusion produced in the humanoid of Darwinist evolution.

What is thought and how is the conscience inacted. Is it not a empty slate that our parents and society slowly fill with what we are to think and act in order to be a part of society. Is this not evolving? Is not the thought process and the understanding of oneself not an example of a person evolving from a child into an adult.

Darwinism results in the idea that all life we observed today wasn't created by God.

Thank you for pointing out the obvious. Did you think that everything would fall into your hands once you called yourself Christian.
I just shake my hear when I see Christians loosing their lives in other countries and Christian's over here think a scientific thery is so detrimental to them.

No, Darwinism results in the explanation for the presence of consciousness. It speaks nothing of the supernatural soul.

What do you think is involved in enacting the conscience. We call it the Soul and we attribute the souol to the supernatural. Evolution only rejects the supernatural aspect of it and it is they who reject the soul because of that inclustion.

I'd be interested in hearing this from an atheist.

Stop talking at them and try talking to them and you just might.

A soul doesn't exist in Darwinist creationism.

darwin is evolution not creaturism and It's not refered to as the sould because of the conitations envolved in that word.

If you point out what I've sidestepped?

Oh yes, I'll just go back over the last 15 posts and quote all of them so you can make more excuses for them. Yeah.

You're completely wrong. Darwinism teaches that the journey was only by naturalistic mechanisms. If we examine these mechanisms we find that they're random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless. And importantly, the journey which produced humans from an alleged single life form of long ago isn't supported by the scientific method.

The journey was a natural one. we did not have Gods help until we recognized him. I would like to see were you get the idea of the scientific meathod.

I would go to the fact that we're more than a sack of chemicals, the product of random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanisms.

I would not go back to your assumptions. they aren't valid.

I'm all for the message of love, mercy, long-suffering, but let's not stop there. There's also judgment and punishment.

And where exactly is it in the Bible that we are in any way envolved in that.

No, I don't think that.

Thank you.

Christ was the epitome of light. In His light existence He promoted righteousness and condemned unrighteousness.

Thank you for this addition, but what does it have to do with countering my post?

Yes, we're all human and flawed.

Thank you. Sorry for the long edit. I messed up and had to rearange everything.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

We're not merely sad sacks of chemicals. We are made of star stuff.

 

[DDan]

We're not merely sad sacks of chemicals. We are made of star stuff.

What do you think 'star stuff' is made of?

We imagine a God and a God exists, we imagine a soul and hey presto we have a soul, our brains get damaged or we change our minds and our God and our soul miraculously disappear.

 

[justlookinla]

What is thought and how is the conscience inacted. Is it not a empty slate that our parents and society slowly fill with what we are to think and act in order to be a part of society. Is this not evolving? Is not the thought process and the understanding of oneself not an example of a person evolving from a child into an adult.

The concept of our existence being more than a sack of chemicals driven by chemical reactions is contrary to Darwinist evolution though. Something beyond ourselves, outside of ourselves, then exists and we are more than a sack of chemicals driven by chemical reactions.

Thank you for pointing out the obvious. Did you think that everything would fall into your hands once you called yourself Christian.
I just shake my hear when I see Christians loosing their lives in other countries and Christian's over here think a scientific thery is so detrimental to them.

While Christians losing their lives for the gospel is a tragedy, the teaching of Darwinism is also a tragedy. While one takes the life of an individual, their soul lives on. On the other hand, Darwinism may spare the life but will destroy the soul.

What do you think is involved in enacting the conscience. We call it the Soul and we attribute the souol to the supernatural. Evolution only rejects the supernatural aspect of it and it is they who reject the soul because of that inclustion.

Darwinist evolution rejects God and rejecting God has dire consequences.

Stop talking at them and try talking to them and you just might.

I would suggest you interact in the manner you deem appropriate and I'll interact in the manner I deem appropriate.

darwin is evolution not creaturism and It's not refered to as the sould because of the conitations envolved in that word.

Darwinism is atheistic creationist pseudo-science and is in direct opposition to God and His word.

Oh yes, I'll just go back over the last 15 posts and quote all of them so you can make more excuses for them. Yeah.

Pick just one of the 15.

The journey was a natural one. we did not have Gods help until we recognized him.

God was involved in the creation of mankind (as well as all creation) before we were born.

I would like to see were you get the idea of the scientific meathod.

I would not go back to your assumptions. they aren't valid.

Point out the part which isn't valid and give your reason why it's not valid.

And where exactly is it in the Bible that we are in any way envolved in that.

That's in the realm of apologetics and that's not allowed on this part of the forum. I certainly don't mind discussing it, but admins have pointed out frequently that's not a subject which is allowed here.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

What do you think 'star stuff' is made of?

http://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/p...mber/why-we-are-made-of-star-stuff-video.html

Why have people claimed you're Consol? Are you?

 

[dad]

Do you have a picture of the Periodic Table of the Elements in your family album, by any chance?

Lol

 

[dad]

We're not merely sad sacks of chemicals. We are made of star stuff. ]

No. We are not. Unless you mean Bright and Morning Star stuff.