5 Questions Evolutionists Can't Answer

[In situ]

Is this the brand of intellectual honesty that works in conjunction with the Arab phone and calling the Jews "ignorant, Bronze Age, goat herders"?

If so, I want no part of it.

It is duly noted you now bring in a Red Herring and puts up a smoke wall when it get to hot under your feet and tries to avoid the real issue at hand; your denial of facts, i.e. your blind faith which you somehow tries to pretend is some kind of legit "faith", while in fact all you do is either expose yourself to deliberate denial or perhaps even are lying about your actual and real belief.

Why should I waste my time talking any more about this issue if you just pull up your "faith card" and fall backs on a intellectual dishonest denial when I have pointed out that your are contrary to facts ?

 

[In situ]

And taking that one step further, the hijackers thought the people they were killing in the twin towers deserved to die for rejecting their god and they were entirely justified in killing them as it was their god's command - sort of reminds me of some of the posts being made in this thread.

Fundies, eh? They're all cut from the same cloth.

Like I said; it opens up Pandora's Box if we every accept it can be justified to kill innocent people. It really scares me, and I find it repulsing, when people like Craig has such disgusting opinion he has about killing human beings... Like I said; Craig seams to lack empathy and that would make him a psychopath, and I would not be surprised if he is; I always get this creepy feeling when I lock at and listen to him. And I trust my gut feelings in this case; Craig is a psychopath. Not saying he is, but it would not surprise me the slightest if Craig torture small animals when he is all alone by himself....

 

[In situ]

So you would shoot it down then?

Would you had made it land safe for everybody involved?

 

[In situ]

Fair enough.

So it's okay for you to shoot down American Airlines Flight 11, but it's not okay for God to order the shooting down of its equivalent?

So the omnipotent loving deity's solution are blood bath all the time?

 

[In situ]

What's this got to do with creation and evolution?

We are investigating Gods purposes of creating humans... and it seams, so far based on AV's answers, to be the case that AV's picture of an omnipotent, superior moral and "loving" deity is a deity that prefers to slaughter innocent humans beings before considering other, more viable and empathic, options... and we are not supposed to question this omnipotent and "loving" deity's purposes and moral superiority...

 

[AV1611VET]

Under the circumstances, yes. Now, were the hijackers justified since they were doing the work of Allah, during a time of Holy War (Jihad) against infidels?

You know the answer to that: NO.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not granted... you making a false analogy with AFF 11.

I totally disagree.

(And for the record, it's AAF 11.)

 

[AV1611VET]

Why should I waste my time talking any more about this issue if you just pull up your "faith card" and fall backs on a intellectual dishonest denial when I have pointed out that your are contrary to facts ?

Oh, I can answer that in a heartbeat:

Because you have plenty of venting & ridicule you need to get off your chest for some reason.

When you're done, you'll quit for awhile -- then you'll be right back at it again later.

 

[AV1611VET]

... and we are not supposed to question this omnipotent and "loving" deity's purposes and moral superiority...

If you want to question Him, do so ... but don't hide behind question marks to vent & ridicule -- it makes you look sad.

 

[In situ]

You didn't take in any of the differences pointed out between your example and the horrific actions of your god in the bible? You can't see any pertinent differences or problems with your analogy at all. Even after they are pointed out to you, not just by me, but by several different people? None of it's registered with you? Nothing at all?

Of course, AV will use his fundamentalist-blind-faith-card to deny all these observations and thereby, in his own mind, invalidate anything you have already said so far. "If I assume am always right, how can I possible then ever be wrong?" - irrationality at its best...

 

[kellhus]

If you want to question Him, do so ... but don't hide behind question marks to vent & ridicule -- it makes you look sad.

No, you're just making Christianity look awful.

 

[AV1611VET]

Of course, AV will use his fundamentalist-blind-faith-card to deny all these observations and thereby, in his own mind, invalidate anything you have already said so far. "If I assume am always right, how can I possible then ever be wrong?" - irrationality at its best...

You just keep on going, don't you?

Just like the Energizer wolf ... er ... bunny.

 

[In situ]

...
(How can I delete a dup message?)

 

[In situ]

In the absence of an absolute, transcendent lawgiver there can be no absolute transcendent moral laws.

I agree.

An atheist has no basis for making any moral judgements, as if there are no absolute moral laws,

I do not agree. Because this is nonsense simply because you don't have to justify your own existence towards other - it has been granted to you. There is no need for absolute moral laws to reach such conclusion.

morality is reduced to a matter of personal preference.

I agree - and this is the reasons behind why we need to respect other peoples to have other points of view, even thou we may not agree with them.

God's moral law says that tne penalty for sin is death. The bible makes it clear that all have sinned. Perfect justice would therefore require that all be condemned. Fortunately for us, God reconciled His perfect justice with His love and mercy for us, by sending His only begotten son, Jesus Christ, to die on the cross for our sins, and to be raised on the third day for our justification, defeating sin and death. If you choose to reject Jesus and His pardon bought on the cross, that is on you, and not Him.

No comments on your preaching... your entailed to have your own opinions but don't count on that everyone will agree with you just because you claim, with no support, that absolute moral laws and deity exists as described in the Bible. In other words we do not have the right to judge each other, all we can do is reject or accept...

but since you believe in absolute moral laws you are judging people....i.e you play spokesman for God, and when you judge you play as God himself... that is why you should not judge others from your own point of view.

 

[In situ]

You have to ask yourself why that is?

Social structured demand social order... no social order no social structures. Good enough as answer or do you need a longer explanation?

 

[In situ]

The problem is that you fail to recognize your current position before a holy God. Yes, He is loving, but He is also just.

Incorrect, the problem is that you failed to give any, whatsoever, objective reliable evidence for the existence of this God and just claims it to be true. On the contrary, there are tons of evidence that suggest that your God does not even exists. Not to mention that physics already ruled out the possibility of an afterlife long ago....

Therefore, as far it concerns me Shiva, Odin and Zeus are just as real as your ideas of a deity and its "love" and "justice"...

 

[In situ]

You know the answer to that: NO.

Says who? It seams to me they are in their own point of views.... why else would they do it?

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Of course, AV will use his fundamentalist-blind-faith-card to deny all these observations and thereby, in his own mind, invalidate anything you have already said so far. "If I assume am always right, how can I possible then ever be wrong?" - irrationality at its best...

It's very odd. AV1611VET seems to have some sort of selective blindness/deafness on this issue. It is as if certain concepts are shredded by a firewall before they reach the part of his brain that considers and analyses ideas. Of course he admits that any ideas/concepts/facts/analyses that do reach his brain and have the potential to interfere with his faith are isolated and binned immediately so that he can continue blissfully believing whatever it is that makes him happy. It looks like we've stumbled onto something that he just can't let himself see. Bizarre.

 

[In situ]

I totally disagree.

So the omnipotent loving god prefers a blood bath instead of more empathic options, like landing the plane safe for all involved? With this, do you concede that moral values are subjective?

(And for the record, it's AAF 11.)

Typo on my part...

 

[In situ]

Oh, I can answer that in a heartbeat:

Because you have plenty of venting & ridicule you need to get off your chest for some reason.

When you're done, you'll quit for awhile -- then you'll be right back at it again later.

Your entailed to your own opinions about me...

But it is not true that I am trying to ridicule you, even if that is what you may feel about it. A more likely reason why you feel being ridiculed is because your blind-faith believe is in fact, if not nutty, at minimum silly. Denying facts are silly minded. You know this too. You are aware of this, in some way or the other, but denies you do denial -that creates cognitive dissonance and feeling inside you and those feeling are projected on to me when I point things out for you.

I don't blame you for feeling and reacting this why, in fact I feel sympathy for you and find it sad that you are unable to liberate your own mind from the brainwashing you been exposed and is, as a matter of fact, trapped in... Like I said, I have no purpose or intent to ridicule you - why should I feel, or have, a need to do that? If I feel anything then it is a sadness for you and your situation...

I know you probably will take this as mocking and ridicule of your person as well, but it isn't... please do understand that some people actually have real, and honest, worries and concerns with fundamentalists and the potential dangerous impact fundamentalism may have on all of us... Flight AAF 11 is just one example...