Be Honest

[gaara4158]

As for me speaking as someone who is Controlled by Satan and His Demons, I think it is VERY unfair that I should ever get a warning about anything I might post.

I mean, its like having Turrets syndrome but worse. I should claim disability.

Don't worry, we all get those little warning notifications.

You think that is funny than you will probably keel over on this.

Dawkins said
I believe it
That settles it

They check their brains in at the door and poke fun of their Creator and refer to themselves as monkies and apes.

Oh we do have fun here on this forum don't we??

Oh! Oh! I see what you did there! Since you follow God and we don't, you figure we must follow Dawkins and go to all his seminars! So you decided to change the name from God to Dawkins and sheep to monkeys! So that our hypocrisy will be exposed!

Oh, you're just too clever

 

[Hespera]

Dawkins said
I believe it
That settles it

They check their brains in at the door and poke fun of their Creator and refer to themselves as monkies and apes.

Oh we do have fun here on this forum don't we??


wow! who are these people you call 'them"? Not me, not anyone i know. not likely anyone you know, or anyone else on this forum. DAWKINS??? i never read any of his stuff. I might as well say "Jimmy Swaggert" as representing how all Christians think.

Really this is totally unfair and unreasonable.

And the part you said about "....refer to themselves as monkies...."

I thought your faith needed no lies from you? Sorry but this is definitely bearing flase witness again. not nice.

As for having fun on this forum, i dont lie and i dont think it is fun to bear false witness or to read someone else doing it. Take a deep breath now, go forth and do it no more.

 

[Inan3]

Dawkins said
I believe it
That settles it

They check their brains in at the door and poke fun of their Creator and refer to themselves as monkies and apes.

Oh we do have fun here on this forum don't we??


wow! who are these people you call 'them"? Not me, not anyone i know. not likely anyone you know, or anyone else on this forum. DAWKINS??? i never read any of his stuff. I might as well say "Jimmy Swaggert" as representing how all Christians think.

Really this is totally unfair and unreasonable.

And the part you said about "....refer to themselves as monkies...."

I thought your faith needed no lies from you? Sorry but this is definitely bearing flase witness again. not nice.

As for having fun on this forum, i dont lie and i dont think it is fun to bear false witness or to read someone else doing it. Take a deep breath now, go forth and do it no more.

Hespera, do you even follow the threads. I was merely being a wiseguy like The Bear and Split Rock. Lighten up!

You might not like to lie and don't think it is fun to bear false witness (which is commendable) but you sure do like to accuse others of doing it even though you are flat out wrong. So I would say seeings most of it is in your mind and you are wrong, get over it or go to another forum where people believe exactly like you and you won't have to suffer needlessly.

 

[Inan3]

Don't worry, we all get those little warning notifications.


Oh! Oh! I see what you did there! Since you follow God and we don't, you figure we must follow Dawkins and go to all his seminars! So you decided to change the name from God to Dawkins and sheep to monkeys! So that our hypocrisy will be exposed!

Oh, you're just too clever

Just read the first part of my answer to Hespera and you will understand. And the answer in truth is, no, I don't think you all go to his seminars, and yes, it was a play on what was already said. Oh, and thank you. I think I am clever, too. I prefer a little friendly sarcasm to out and out hatred and viciousness!

 

[gaara4158]

Just read the first part of my answer to Hespera and you will understand. And the answer in truth is, no, I don't think you all go to his seminars, and yes, it was a play on what was already said. Oh, and thank you. I think I am clever, too. I prefer a little friendly sarcasm to out and out hatred and viciousness!

I'm glad. However, I think you'll find that friendly sarcasm often escalates into bitter flaming, which is what gets us those warnings in the first place.
I think that you'll also find that no one will take you seriously until you back up your claims that evolution is wrong and God is real. Right now, we're just going "yes!" and "no!" back and forth. Hardly a fruitful discussion.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Hespera, do you even follow the threads. I was merely being a wiseguy like The Bear and Split Rock. Lighten up!

You might not like to lie and don't think it is fun to bear false witness (which is commendable) but you sure do like to accuse others of doing it even though you are flat out wrong. So I would say seeings most of it is in your mind and you are wrong, get over it or go to another forum where people believe exactly like you and you won't have to suffer needlessly.

Never forget Poe's law: you can't distinguish a parody of fundamentalist Christianity from the real thing. And let's face it, it's hard to tell with you .

Welcome back, btw!

 

[Hespera]

Just read the first part of my answer to Hespera and you will understand. And the answer in truth is, no, I don't think you all go to his seminars, and yes, it was a play on what was already said. Oh, and thank you. I think I am clever, too. I prefer a little friendly sarcasm to out and out hatred and viciousness!

As others have pointed out in various ways, a "little friendly sarcasm"can be difficult to distinguish from hatred and viciousness. I guess I should really cut out all sarcasm from my posts, with that in mind.

For vicious hatred we do of course have those here who say things like that all who subscribe to science are controlled by the devil and his demons, that all native americans were "evil" and that god sent the europeans to destroy them for their evil. Im glad its not you saying those things.

I hope you will accept that I dont hate anyone (which I am going to guess that I may have far more reason for some hatred than you do... i certainly hope so) and if i appear to be vicious to you.. which I hope I dont..that it is your interpretation, not my heart.. because Im not a vicious person.

 

[maybenotcrazy]

but sigh... why not.
If I filled a cheerios box with a mix of old cheerios and fresh ones because I'm crazy and bought a new one before the old one finished and found that all my cheerios were rotten would that mean that all of them are past the expiration date? Sure the lord could have placed quantities of energy, substance etc. that "hint" at age but in fact only hint at his whim, his pleasure. You interpret it as age because you have equations of exponential decay, you interpret age as decay, distance from parallax effects hence measure the age of the universe using the time light takes to travel/background radiation etc. You know on second thought, I really think I should stop being a creationist because I don't think God can do what he wills. I think God is like the wizard of oz a man behind a curtain not the creator and lord. What do you think? People are going to throw away their faith because of measurements of quantities of substances and light? I will throw away my cheerios, not because they're all expired but because they're rotten. Like human wisdom and its consequences.


What an idiot I must be.

 

[Naraoia]

And the gas bill in your mailbox is probably also just God's whim. He likes playing tricksy tricks on people. You don't actually have to pay anything. Really.

If you subscribe to that philosophy, how do you know anything implies anything?

 

[maybenotcrazy]

And the gas bill in your mailbox is probably also just God's whim. He likes playing tricksy tricks on people. You don't actually have to pay anything. Really.

If you subscribe to that philosophy, how do you know anything implies anything?

I wouldn't call what god did tricks. I call the human attempt to interpret them folly. My gas bill is not related to the relative amounts of uranium of isotope X with lead and isotope Y or the relative amount of carbon 14 in something. The closer something is to you the more meaningful it is until you are the one in direct contact with it. Then it becomes your problem, like that gas bill. There is something about the universe which I would describe as time and distance as well as impersonality implies unreliability as far as scientific explanations go. When something is observed before you as cause and effect it works as such but when you take that and abstract it to something you can't observe (I mean literally observe), it does not apply. Even atoms are not what they seem though they can be observed to a degree. This is a tenuous philosophy I know but it at least approximates my view.

I have a better appreciation for the uncertainty principle now. It is kind of analogous . If you know a lot about something that happens now, to that degree you will not be able to apply that knowledge to a temporal sequence of processes going back over a time period proportional to how certain you are about that knowledge. Where h bar fits in I'll get back to you on

 

[Wiccan_Child]

but sigh... why not.
If I filled a cheerios box with a mix of old cheerios and fresh ones because I'm crazy and bought a new one before the old one finished and found that all my cheerios were rotten would that mean that all of them are past the expiration date? Sure the lord could have placed quantities of energy, substance etc. that "hint" at age but in fact only hint at his whim, his pleasure.

Ah, the Omphalos argument rears its head. The universe was created to look old, but is in fact young.

You interpret it as age because you have equations of exponential decay, you interpret age as decay, distance from parallax effects hence measure the age of the universe using the time light takes to travel/background radiation etc.

Or, to put it in English, God created light mid-way to Earth. The supernovae observed over the past 1800 years never actually happened! God just created their light to make it look as if they did. Oh what a joker our Lord is .

You know on second thought, I really think I should stop being a creationist because I don't think God can do what he wills. I think God is like the wizard of oz a man behind a curtain not the creator and lord. What do you think?

I think you are being facetious. Obviously, there are inherent epistemological limits to how certain we can be about any conclusion we make; we could, after all, be just brains in a vat.

People are going to throw away their faith because of measurements of quantities of substances and light?

I should certainly hope so. Faith stagnates inquiry and research, and produces absolutely nothing testable or useful. "I have faith that the magic gravity gnomes will stop pulling me down when I jump off this building!"

What an idiot I must be.

No comment.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ah, the Omphalos argument rears its head.

...

Oh what a joker our Lord is .

Why would you accuse Him of being a joker, if He meticulously documented what He did, when He did it, where He did it, how He did it, why He did it, and even who the eyewitnesses were --- then preserved that Documentation to make sure It was available to to those of us today who may come to the wrong conclusion by looking at the universe with substandard equipment?

Ignorance of the Law is no excuse.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Why would you accuse Him of being a joker, if He meticulously documented what He did, when He did it, where He did it, how He did it, why He did it, and even who the eyewitnesses were --- then preserved that Documentation to make sure It was available to to those of us today who may come to the wrong conclusion by looking at the universe with substandard equipment?

Because this documentation is nowhere to be found. There are many texts compiled, translated, and interpreted in a plethora of different ways, none of which is more credible than the others.

If you're referring to the KJV Bible (because I know you are ), it only 'meticulously documents' what he did (namely, create the Heavens and the Earth). There is no meticulous documentation for when ("In the beginning" is tautologous, not meticulous), where (though this might be a moot question), how, or why he did it, nor of who was there.

Ignorance of the Law is no excuse.

It is when there are many different proposed Laws, none more credible than the others.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because this documentation is nowhere to be found.

Keep looking.

Burying your head in the sand in order to claim God is a joker is just plain blasphemy.

I think I made an excellent point --- you can handwave it away if you want, but don't expect us go along with it.

Handwaving the written Documentation away is dangerous and can lead to pogroms.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Keep looking.

I never stop. Despite all the claims I've heard, none have justified themselves. So, I'll keep looking.

Burying your head in the sand in order to claim God is a joker is just plain blasphemy.

I was making a point to maybenotcrazy. If you wish to take my words at face value, that's your problem. I only hope he isn't so literal-minded.

I think I made an excellent point

I'm so pleased for you. Would you like a cake?

Handwaving the written Documentation away is dangerous and can lead to pogroms.

Yes, because asking for verification is now seen as 'hand-waving'.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, because asking for verification is now seen as 'hand-waving'.

I'm not going to play games with you.

I don't know about where you're from, but over here we have four kinds of sentences:

• declarative
• impreative
• interrogative
• exclamatory

There is no meticulous documentation for when ("In the beginning" is tautologous, not meticulous), where (though this might be a moot question), how, or why he did it, nor of who was there.

This sentence is declarative --- not interrogative.

You were not asking for verification.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I'm not going to play games with you.

I don't know about where you're from, but over here we have four kinds of sentences:

• declarative
• impreative
• interrogative
• exclamatory

This sentence is declarative --- not interrogative.

You were not asking for verification.

Not in that sentence, no. But then, I never said I asked for verification here. It's more of a standing order. Besides, it should be obvious that verification is a requirement.

 

[Hespera]

Where I come from there are a lot more kinds of sentences than that.

Here are some that Twain mentioned:

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Autobiography of Mark Twain

 

[Inan3]

Because this documentation is nowhere to be found. There are many texts compiled, translated, and interpreted in a plethora of different ways, none of which is more credible than the others.

If you're referring to the KJV Bible (because I know you are ), it only 'meticulously documents' what he did (namely, create the Heavens and the Earth). There is no meticulous documentation for when ("In the beginning" is tautologous, not meticulous), where (though this might be a moot question), how, or why he did it, nor of who was there.


It is when there are many different proposed Laws, none more credible than the others.

It is everywhere to be found by those who are looking for it. You will NEVER find God's truth as long as you resist Him. You must believe that He is before you will ever know Him or His kingdom. WC you only oppose yourself. God is waiting for you. Don't shut Him out of your life forever. There is no one here on this forum or in the scientific arena or educational system or where ever who is worth losing your life with God for. He's for you not against you. Give Him a chance.

 

[Inan3]

Where I come from there are a lot more kinds of sentences than that.

Here are some that Twain mentioned:

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Autobiography of Mark Twain

Hespera, I don't think that was the point. You are too young to be so angry. I know you don't like it when you are that way.