- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,015
- 52,623
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
I somehow don't think you see me when you look at a mirror.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I somehow don't think you see me when you look at a mirror.It is you who is calling Him a liar, not me.
(Which I don't even see the point of non-Christians coming to a Christian website in the first place unless you people really don't have a life.)
Well if the ToE was being opposed as late as 1989, I guess that should be good enough to say that the ToE was being opposed as late as 1989 ... don't you think?
I'm fond of asking these guys:Absolutely!
Lollerskates said:To show Christians the errs of our deluded ways for believing in a sky god. Haven't you been to the Ethics and Morality forum?
I would say "misguided" is an appropriate word here; considering whose music they're dancing to.I try not to because of all the misguided people using words such as "fairy tales" and "sky god".
So many lost individuals, it's just sad that people still think evolution is possible and that God isn't real. (Which I don't even see the point of non-Christians coming to a Christian website in the first place unless you people really don't have a life.)
Isn't it amazing how people who have never created life can so freely critique the work of one who has; even going so far as to say that they have such a profound understanding of biology and science that if any genetic design doesn't fit with how they think it should be then the God who created it must be a liar or a deceiver. Atheists give testimony to the veracity of Psalms 14:1 on a daily basis. If you can get past their childish blaspheme it can be amusing to watch them discussing the characteristics of a God in which they don't believe.
Who are they trying to fool? Each other?
This thread is about whether people believe in evolution. Perhaps we should start another called, "If you have no clue what you're talking about, please give your opinion on how man should have been designed." The reason that we hear the same arguments over and over is that they all come from the same textbook. Atheists think they are profound because they can ask the same questions atheists ask day in and day out. It certainly takes a sound mind to cut and paste the things you read in a textbook. None of them seem to actually understand the nature of science.
Here's a clue. Science does not equal reality. In a purely physical world we're born, we reproduce and we die. That's it. There is no need for love. Monogamy is contrary to continued reproduction. We should care nothing about the condition of the world we leave behind because we won't be here. If something will benefit me then I should take it. There can be no right or wrong in a physical world, only what is productive and what is counterproductive. It makes perfect sense to kill someone who might otherwsie eat your food. Dedicating your life to helping others is meaningless. There is no morality, no reward for good deeds, nothing but cool dirt at the end of the life span.
Surprise! We don't live in that world! In this world there is good and evil. No matter how you lie to yourself you still have a conscience which tells you what's right and wrong; even if you refuse to follow it. Where did that come from? What was the name of that tree in Eden again?
In a true physical world, every single reported NDE is a lie. Every premonition is a lie. Every reported apparition is a lie. Every unexplained image on film had to be fabricated. Ouija boards don't work and have never worked. Everyone who has ever felt the presence of God is insane. Every soldier who sacrifices himself for another is a fool.
I'm glad I don't live in your world.
Isn't it amazing how people who have never created life can so freely critique the work of one who has; even going so far as to say that they have such a profound understanding of biology and science that if any genetic design doesn't fit with how they think it should be then the God who created it must be a liar or a deceiver. Atheists give testimony to the veracity of Psalms 14:1 on a daily basis. If you can get past their childish blaspheme it can be amusing to watch them discussing the characteristics of a God in which they don't believe.
Who are they trying to fool? Each other?
This thread is about whether people believe in evolution. Perhaps we should start another called, "If you have no clue what you're talking about, please give your opinion on how man should have been designed." The reason that we hear the same arguments over and over is that they all come from the same textbook. Atheists think they are profound because they can ask the same questions atheists ask day in and day out. It certainly takes a sound mind to cut and paste the things you read in a textbook. None of them seem to actually understand the nature of science.
Here's a clue. Science does not equal reality. In a purely physical world we're born, we reproduce and we die. That's it. There is no need for love. Monogamy is contrary to continued reproduction. We should care nothing about the condition of the world we leave behind because we won't be here. If something will benefit me then I should take it. There can be no right or wrong in a physical world, only what is productive and what is counterproductive. It makes perfect sense to kill someone who might otherwsie eat your food. Dedicating your life to helping others is meaningless. There is no morality, no reward for good deeds, nothing but cool dirt at the end of the life span.
Surprise! We don't live in that world! In this world there is good and evil. No matter how you lie to yourself you still have a conscience which tells you what's right and wrong; even if you refuse to follow it. Where did that come from? What was the name of that tree in Eden again?
In a true physical world, every single reported NDE is a lie. Every premonition is a lie. Every reported apparition is a lie. Every unexplained image on film had to be fabricated. Ouija boards don't work and have never worked. Everyone who has ever felt the presence of God is insane. Every soldier who sacrifices himself for another is a fool.
I'm glad I don't live in your world.
If there are scientists who oppose evolution, is it okay if I oppose it as well? or do I have to be a scientist as well?
Who could possibly wade through this ocean of bilge?
I'm fond of asking these guys:
If there are scientists who oppose evolution, is it okay if I oppose it as well? or do I have to be a scientist as well?
So many lost individuals, it's just sad that people still think evolution is possible
This thread is about whether people believe in evolution. Perhaps we should start another called, "If you have no clue what you're talking about, please give your opinion on how man should have been designed."
Methinks you should follow your own advice.Monogamy is contrary to continued reproduction.
Isn't it amazing how people who have never created life can so freely critique the work of one who has; even going so far as to say that they have such a profound understanding of biology and science that if any genetic design doesn't fit with how they think it should be then the God who created it must be a liar or a deceiver. Atheists give testimony to the veracity of Psalms 14:1 on a daily basis. If you can get past their childish blaspheme it can be amusing to watch them discussing the characteristics of a God in which they don't believe.
Who are they trying to fool? Each other?
This thread is about whether people believe in evolution. Perhaps we should start another called, "If you have no clue what you're talking about, please give your opinion on how man should have been designed." The reason that we hear the same arguments over and over is that they all come from the same textbook. Atheists think they are profound because they can ask the same questions atheists ask day in and day out. It certainly takes a sound mind to cut and paste the things you read in a textbook. None of them seem to actually understand the nature of science.
Here's a clue. Science does not equal reality. In a purely physical world we're born, we reproduce and we die. That's it. There is no need for love. Monogamy is contrary to continued reproduction. We should care nothing about the condition of the world we leave behind because we won't be here. If something will benefit me then I should take it. There can be no right or wrong in a physical world, only what is productive and what is counterproductive. It makes perfect sense to kill someone who might otherwsie eat your food. Dedicating your life to helping others is meaningless. There is no morality, no reward for good deeds, nothing but cool dirt at the end of the life span.
Surprise! We don't live in that world! In this world there is good and evil. No matter how you lie to yourself you still have a conscience which tells you what's right and wrong; even if you refuse to follow it. Where did that come from? What was the name of that tree in Eden again?
In a true physical world, every single reported NDE is a lie. Every premonition is a lie. Every reported apparition is a lie. Every unexplained image on film had to be fabricated. Ouija boards don't work and have never worked. Everyone who has ever felt the presence of God is insane. Every soldier who sacrifices himself for another is a fool.
I'm glad I don't live in your world.
Interestingly, physicists and cosmologists are the least likely to buy into evolution because they realize the neccessity of causation to existence. The universe had to come from somewhere, but there is no provision in science for the spontaneous creation of matter/ energy. The catalyst had to come from somewhere beyond our understanding or from a source that physical science simply cannot study. The supernatural cannot be studied scientifically, thus it can be neither proved nor disproved. We can learn all about what is, but how it came about remains speculation.I'm a physicist... does that count?
The supernatural cannot be studied scientifically, thus it can be neither proved nor disproved.
Friedrich Nietzsche said:Metaphysical world. It is true, there might be a metaphysical world; one can hardly dispute the absolute possibility of it. We see all things by means of our human head, and cannot chop it off, though it remains to wonder what would be left of the world if indeed it had been cut off. This is a purely scientific problem, and not very suited to cause men worry. But all that has produced metaphysical assumptions and made them valuable, horrible, pleasurable to men thus far is passion, error, and self-deception. The very worst methods of knowledge, not the very best, have taught us to believe in them. When one has disclosed these methods to be the foundation of all existing religions and metaphysical systems, one has refuted them. That other possibility still remains, but we cannot begin to do anything with it, let alone allow our happiness, salvation, and life to depend on the spider webs of such a possibility. For there is nothing at all we could state about the metaphysical world except its differentness, a differentness inaccessible and incomprehensible to us. It would be a thing with negative qualities.
No matter how well proven the existence of such a world might be, it would still hold true that the knowledge of it would be the most inconsequential of all knowledge, even more inconsequential than the knowledge of the chemical analysis of water must be to the boatman facing a storm.
Eight Foot Manchild said:I dare you demonstrate that it isn't.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?