My Documentation Challenge

[Subduction Zone]

You just trampled those pearls, remember?

You have no pearls. Remember?

 

[HitchSlap]

And when they crucified him upside down* (at his request), he died knowing he fooled them, didn't he?

There's no evidence this ever happened.*

 

[AV1611VET]

Even if he did request that it no more proves that Jesus was real than Buddhist monks lighting themselves on fire proves that Buddha is real.

Was Buddha literate?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Was Buddha literate?

It does not matter.

ETA: But he probably was. He did come from at least an upper class family, if I remember correctly.

 

[HitchSlap]

Was Buddha literate?

He was enlightened.

 

[AV1611VET]

There's no evidence this ever happened.*

I didn't ask for any.*

 

[AV1611VET]

It does not matter.

ETA: But he probably was. He did come from at least an upper class family, if I remember correctly.

Pray tell.

What marks the dividing line between "prehistoric" and "historic"?

 

[AV1611VET]

He was enlightened.

Spirit filled?

 

[HitchSlap]

Spirit filled?

You'd know.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Pray tell.

What marks the dividing line between "prehistoric" and "historic"?

Buddhists are not making the same ridiculous claims that you are. You have wandered off topic in your desperation.

 

[GazzaStott]

Only today's educated elite would read something someone else claimed to have written, claim it wasn't they who wrote it, then claim the claimers couldn't write they claimed it, because ... for some odd reason not specified ... they were illiterate.

Why would a fisherman in those days need to be educated? where would they go to be educated? how could they afford to be educated? if they had spare money why would they waste it getting educated?
32 million adults in the U.S. can't read two thousand years later so what makes you think 2000 years ago peasant fishermen were not illiterate? because someone wrote in a book that they weren't? pull the other one it's got bells on.

 

[Vaccine]

The first part of your post has been shown to be wrong. So what are the supposed flaws in the theory of evolution?

Really? I asked a question and was shown to be wrong? How does that work?

I don't have an issue with the theory of evolution. I have an issue with people believing a scientific theory somehow proves their philosophy.

 

[Vaccine]

Oh come on...

Answers in Genesis statement of faith:

By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

Creation.com about us:

Facts are always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information. By definition, therefore, no interpretation of facts in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record.

Insitute for Creation Research what we do:

The Institute for Creation Research is unique among scientific research organizations. Our research is conducted within a biblical worldview, since ICR is committed to the absolute authority of the inerrant Word of God. The real facts of science will always agree with biblical revelation because the God who made the world of God inspired the Word of God.

I could go on but I resent giving those type of sites any more clicks.

Thanks for trying but I asked for some sort of poll. Something along the lines of such and such % of people reject evolution because of such and such. Also, traffic to a website isn't a poll.

 

[Speedwell]

Really? I asked a question and was shown to be wrong? How does that work?

I don't have an issue with the theory of evolution. I have an issue with people believing a scientific theory somehow proves their philosophy.

I suppose by philosophy you mean atheism. But the theory of evolution does not "prove" atheism and everybody knows it; it merely offers no objection to it, any more than it does to theism.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Why would a fisherman in those days need to be educated? where would they go to be educated? how could they afford to be educated? if they had spare money why would they waste it getting educated?
32 million adults in the U.S. can't read two thousand years later so what makes you think 2000 years ago peasant fishermen were not illiterate? because someone wrote in a book that they weren't? pull the other one it's got bells on.

I would expect that someone wanting something written in those days (even the literate) would dictate it to a scribe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Really? I asked a question and was shown to be wrong? How does that work?

Your question was really not a question. I guess that you either did not follow or did not understand the conversation.

I don't have an issue with the theory of evolution. I have an issue with people believing a scientific theory somehow proves their philosophy.

No one is trying to use the fact that you share a common ancestor with chimpanzees to prove anything. Where did you get that idea from?

 

[GazzaStott]

I would expect that someone wanting something written in those days (even the literate) would dictate it to a scribe.

Who would want to be paid.

 

[Jimmy D]

Thanks for trying but I asked for some sort of poll. Something along the lines of such and such % of people reject evolution because of such and such. Also, traffic to a website isn't a poll.

There are polls available on line, I think the main website is called pewforum if you're interested.

I apologise if I read too much into your post but I got the impression that you were implying that there were reasons for rejecting the TOE that aren't based on religion, a view I would strongly disagree with.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You're supposed to combine the Gospels to get the whole story.

Well, you've got two Gospels that say he wasn't there, and two that say he was. Combine those.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Why does the Bible need to be interpreted and who says it does?

And whose interpretations should we accept as (for lack of a better word) gospel?