Creation, where's the Proof.

[Nathan Poe]

4th April 2003 at 08:52 PM Osiris said this in Post #57

Natha Poe has a point, and I think his Victor Hugo quote did fit nice with what he had to say and was not put there just to sound intelligent.
Imagine everyone in this world was christian, there would be no science -- we would forbid for anyone to study it or learn it because it will only make the student fall away from christendom. There would be no medicines, and people will easily get sick and die, and would be treated as a God-sent plague. We wouldn't be able to travel to other places as we do today, because people wouldn't have invented cars or airplanes. An example would be Amish Country in philadelphia...

We don't have to imagine; there was a time in history not unlike this. It was called "the Dark Ages," and for good reason.

 

[Nathan Poe]

4th April 2003 at 08:59 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #59


You people are as fickle as evolution theory.
One minute you say that it was christians who were the scientists who founded some of this theory, and then you make a statement like that

Who said that?

 

[Nathan Poe]

4th April 2003 at 08:36 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #55

"An intelligent hell would be better than a stupid paradise." --Victor Hugo.

FOC:
very arrogant ignorance in this comment.

Was this quoted to sound intelligent ?

Kind of like cutting off ones nose to spite ones face if you ask me.

Awww.... c'mon FOC, where are you comments about the rest of my post? Surely you have more to say than this...

 

[Follower of Christ]

4th April 2003 at 09:58 PM Nathan Poe said this in Post #63



Awww.... c'mon FOC, where are you comments about the rest of my post? Surely you have more to say than this...

I have been running around all day so the brain is somewhat disfunctional.

I will have better stuff tomorrow.

 

[euphoric]

5th April 2003 at 01:47 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #56



This is where I have to draw the line.

I wonder how much some of your higher ups in the evolution league make every year. I dont see you crying to them about it.

I find it quite offensive that you are sticking your nose into what Ken Hamm makes.

Its just a cheap shot as you have run out of other ideas for an attack, so you feel that pointing out his income will prove your point.

It doesnt. It makes you look childish and for lack of a better word, ignorant.


If christians feel that they are giving Ken Hamm $200,000 to do what he does, it is NONE of your business at all.

And guess what, whether its justified in your eyes is NOT important to us in the slightest.

Grow up and go back to trying to prove some real issue

Scientists (real ones) don't go around soliciting donations and then living off them.  Plenty of scientists working for private firms make $100,000 dollars or more, that's not the point.  The point is Hamm runs a ministry and solicits donations.  People donate so that he can spread the YEC philosophy and message, not have a nicer car or house or whatever he's doing with two hundred grand.  I doubt most of the faithful who give have any idea what he makes.  Using people's religious beliefs to get money out of them and then appropriating a large chunk of it for your own personal use is dishonest.

-brett


 

 

[Follower of Christ]

Youre right.

At least Ken Hamm is given money to him by those who BELIEVE in his cause.

Its not up to you to dictate how christians who give him funds want him to spend it.
I, for one, hope that he does get a large salary. He deserves it.



''The point is Hamm runs a ministry and solicits donations. ''

FOC: you have no point, you have just run out of legitimate arguements



''I doubt most of the faithful who give have any idea what he makes''

FOC:Obviously you all found out, so the information is not hidden somewhere.
Stop lying to yourself.


''Using people's religious beliefs to get money out of them and then appropriating a large chunk of it for your own personal use is dishonest.''


FOC:
Oh yes, us poor, pitiful, ignorant christians will give our food money to anyone in Gods name. Oh wait, WE WILL.
And again I point out, its NONE of your concern.
We do with our money as we wish and need not justify it to you.

 

[Nathan Poe]

5th April 2003 at 10:49 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #66

Youre right.

At least Ken Hamm is given money to him by those who BELIEVE in his cause.

Its not up to you to dictate how christians who give him funds want him to spend it.
I, for one, hope that he does get a large salary. He deserves it.

The people he exploits don't even realize they're being expolited. I guess that makes it all right, then.

''The point is Hamm runs a ministry and solicits donations. ''

FOC: you have no point, you have just run out of legitimate arguements

et tu, FOC?

''I doubt most of the faithful who give have any idea what he makes''

FOC:Obviously you all found out, so the information is not hidden somewhere.
Stop lying to yourself.

Seek and ye shall find. Most of the faithful don't care what Hamm makes. They just shut their mouths and do as they're told... give money. I suppose that makes it all right, then.

''Using people's religious beliefs to get money out of them and then appropriating a large chunk of it for your own personal use is dishonest.''


FOC:
Oh yes, us poor, pitiful, ignorant christians will give our food money to anyone in Gods name. Oh wait, WE WILL.
And again I point out, its NONE of your concern.
We do with our money as we wish and need not justify it to you.

We're worried when the faithful have their faith expolited for the profit of another. We call it, "morality."

But since they want to be exploited, I suppose that makes it all right, then.

 

[Osiris]

Who should get paid more, a doctor or a priest? If priests are supposed to get paid "double honor", imagine everyone was a priest. Everyone would get paid double honor, there would be no doctors, no science, no advance in technology.

And I believe your scripture says "The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching."... that doesn't say all of them should get paid, it means they should be put into consideration, meaning they shouldn't be paid unless they work hard at what they do. Yet there are many out there getting paid for taking advantage of their followers and molesting their children. But the way I see it, religions now are more like an industry making money off its followers. What ever happened to leave your earthly belongings behind and follow the word of God? maybe that phrase is only aimed at the followers giving money to the priest... but I guess you are right, since God is on your side.

 

[Osiris]

5th April 2003 at 10:49 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #66


FOC:
Oh yes, us poor, pitiful, ignorant christians will give our food money to anyone in Gods name. Oh wait, WE WILL.
And again I point out, its NONE of your concern.
We do with our money as we wish and need not justify it to you.

This sounds more like addiction to cocaine or any other related drugs, people are hooked on them so they pay alot of money to get them.

Victims of religious predators are hooked on the fear of going to hell. Thus giving money in god's name will assure them a place in heaven. Why is money necessary in the first place?? You can't buy yourself a place in heaven, why do you accept money or why do you even take it?? Isn't salvation individual??  I would understand money to feed starving children, most of the times this isnt the case.

 

[euphoric]

5th April 2003 at 03:49 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #66

Youre right.

At least Ken Hamm is given money to him by those who BELIEVE in his cause.

Its not up to you to dictate how christians who give him funds want him to spend it.
I, for one, hope that he does get a large salary. He deserves it.



''The point is Hamm runs a ministry and solicits donations. ''

FOC: you have no point, you have just run out of legitimate arguements



''I doubt most of the faithful who give have any idea what he makes''

FOC:Obviously you all found out, so the information is not hidden somewhere.
Stop lying to yourself.


''Using people's religious beliefs to get money out of them and then appropriating a large chunk of it for your own personal use is dishonest.''


FOC:
Oh yes, us poor, pitiful, ignorant christians will give our food money to anyone in Gods name. Oh wait, WE WILL.
And again I point out, its NONE of your concern.
We do with our money as we wish and need not justify it to you.

Get your knickers out of their bunch.  Hamm runs a ministry and frankly fundamentalist christians aren't the most skeptical people in the world.  Ken Hamm sells them a line that they want to hear and they send him money in return.  I think you'll find very few people who send money to AIG expect that their money is going towards Hamm's lifestyle rather than spreading the message.  Obviously they expect the ministry to pay him a salary, but I doubt most of them expect it to be that much money. 

-brett

 

[lucaspa]

4th April 2003 at 10:19 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #11

Brett: Not only would it be a strange role, it would be a highly deceptive one as well.  Add to the list angular unconformities, biogeography, shared endogenous retroviruses and a host of other things we've discussed lately and the level of God's deception, if the Earth is in fact young, is mindblowing.


I keep trying to point out this very thing.
IT would NOT be unlike God to use something just like this.

To any of you out there thinking God is some helpless old grandfather type who doesnt get overly involved (including Christians), I ask that you start spending more time in books like Exodus and such.

Wait a minute, FoC. It is not unlike God to lie to us?  Please justify that.

It was this theological problem of God lying that caused Charles Kingsley to reject the Oomphalos argument back in 1848.

Saying that the universe only looks old, like Gosse and you do, does indeed make God into a liar.  This is the reason why Christians were so quick to abandon YEC in the first place.

 

[lucaspa]

4th April 2003 at 10:26 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #14

But they love you scoffers enough to spend thier days trying to reach you at a level you can understand.

Telling untruths about the universe isn't going to reach anyone.  All it will do is drive people away from Christianity. 

(Which may be what AiG wants to do all along.)

 

[lucaspa]

4th April 2003 at 04:09 AM Freedom777 said this in Post #1

Get the answer here, http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4179.asp

Freedom, I never saw any "proof" at that site, only trying to confuse you.

For instance:
"However, if we weren’t there in the past to observe events, how can we know what happened so we can explain the present? It would be great to have a time machine so we could know for sure about past events."

The present is the way it is because the past was the way it was.  IOW, cause and effect.  No one saw a meteor hit the earth to form Meteor Crator, yet no creationist has problems knowing that this happened. Also, creastionists maintain that they can figure out what the Flood did even tho no one saw the Flood do the particular events:  sort the animals into the sequence seen in the fossil record, for instance.

So creationists aren't consistent in this.

"Evolutionists have certain beliefs about the past/present that they presuppose, e.g. no God (or at least none who performed acts of special creation), so they build a different way of thinking to interpret the evidence of the present."

Ah, the old "evolution is atheism" fallacy.  The author isn't arguing about evolution, but about atheism.  It's too bad the author says theism can only exist if you take a literalistic reading of Genesis 1-8.  Because that literalism is wrong.

Darwin certainly never presupposed "no God".  His Fontispiece makes that clear, but creationists never seem to look at things that refute their own presuppositions.  Does this sound like "no God"?

"But with regard to the material world, we can at least go so far as this -- we can perceive that events are brought about not by insulated interpositions of Divine power, exerted in each particular case, but by the establishment of general laws"  Whewell:  Bridgewater Treatise. 

"The only distinct meaning of the word 'natural' is stated, fixed, or settled; since what is natural as much requires and presupposes an intelligent agent to render it so, i.e., to effect it continually or at stated times, as what is supernatural or miraculous does to effect it for once."  Butler:  Analogy of Revealed Religion.

"To conclude, therefore, let no man out of a weak conceit of sobriety, or an ill-applied moderation, think or maintain, that a man can search too far or be too well studied in the book of God's word, or in the book of God's works; divinity or philosophy; but rather let men endeavour an endless progress or proficience in both."  Bacon: Advancement of Learning

Freedom, you are being conned and don't even realize the con.

It's up to us to point it out to you.


 

 

[Follower of Christ]

5th April 2003 at 03:19 PM lucaspa said this in Post #71



Wait a minute, FoC. It is not unlike God to lie to us?  Please justify that.

Classic case of twisting/distorting words agian.

I did NOT say God lies.

I have shown ACTUALL SCRIPTURAL PROOF that God will indeed send decieving spirits and influences to those already choosing to believe what they want over HIS truth.


Again. LOOK at 2 Thess. chap. 2 and 2 Chronicles chap. 18 if you want to see what our God will do to those refusing His wonderful truth.

 

[Nathan Poe]

5th April 2003 at 03:35 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #74




Classic case of twisting/distorting words agian.

I did NOT say God lies.

I have shown ACTUALL SCRIPTURAL PROOF that God will indeed send decieving spirits and influences to those already choosing to believe what they want over HIS truth.


Again. LOOK at 2 Thess. chap. 2 and 2 Chronicles chap. 18 if you want to see what our God will do to those refusing His wonderful truth.

So God does lie, but only to non-believers. Okay.....

 

[Follower of Christ]

Holy Cow, are you dense?

God does NOT lie.

He either can send a decieving influence to those who refuse the truth, or He may harden or blind them further.
Romans 9 with Pharoah is another example.

 

[Nathan Poe]

5th April 2003 at 03:59 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #76

Holy Cow, are you dense?

God does NOT lie.

He either can send a decieving influence to those who refuse the truth, or He may harden or blind them further.
Romans 9 with Pharoah is another example.

Well, golly gee whiz, I think I'm finally starting to get it. It took me a while to get through all the semantics...

God does not lie, however, he does send lying spirits to Earth.

But that's okay because:

1. The people don't believe in God anyway, and therefore don't count.

2. God's doesn't do any of the deceiving Himself, so technically, He's not to blame.

Does this sum it up?

 

[Arikay]

LOL

He either can send a decieving influence to those who refuse the truth

FoC you do realize to decieve someone is equivilant to lieing, right?

 

[Follower of Christ]

As I said before, christians are not obliged to explain to you about the salaries/funds provided for our ministries.

If you feel that Ken Hamm makes too much money I have only one thing to say...Tough.

 

[Follower of Christ]

5th April 2003 at 04:07 PM Nathan Poe said this in Post #77



Well, golly gee whiz, I think I'm finally starting to get it. It took me a while to get through all the semantics...

God does not lie, however, he does send lying spirits to Earth.

But that's okay because:

1. The people don't believe in God anyway, and therefore don't count.

2. God's doesn't do any of the deceiving Himself, so technically, He's not to blame.

Does this sum it up?

You know, if you would actually break out that dusty old book under your coffe table, you might learn who God is and how He does things.

If you refuse to, then dont expect to even have the slightest idea of what you're talking about concerning scripture or God.