• 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.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Evolution is just a theory!

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

There is no reason for biologists to entertain your particular creation myth of choice, which you most likely only believe in because of geographic accident.

Your religious ideas and beliefs are quite irrelevant in the lab.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Blame the theory of evolution on apes. Man looks at apes(1*), looks at themselves(2*)-
all of a sudden the headline reads 'we evolved'(3*).


You seem to be missing a few steps between 2 and 3.

A "few steps" that, these days, is worth +150 years of research by thousands, millions, of biologists.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

And you have no proof that rainbows don't mark the place where the leprechauns have hidden pots of gold.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Are you trying to suggest that Noah was not a real person, there was no flood and there was no Ark filled with animals?


Not only would I suggest that. I'ld flat out tell you that.
Indeed, there was no Noah, no ark filled with animals and most certainly no global flood.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

Accusing others of not being "real christians" is against the forum rules.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
But you knew that before you came here hunting dogma so what's your point? This is a religious forum.

The point, obviously, is that the burden of proof is with the one who makes the positive claim.

The claim that requires evidence in support of it is that leprachauns hid pots of gold in places marked by rainbows. Absent that evidence, the claim may be dissmissed at face value.

The same goes for religious claims, or indeed any other faith-based claim.

That which is asserted without evidence, can be dissmissed without evidence.

So telling me that "I can't prove X is NOT true" in an attempt at making your faith-based claims concerning X to sound more credible, is no more or less then a logic failure. It's trying to shift the burden of proof.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married

Atheist dogma hunters choose questions that can't be answered without subjectively experiencing it yourself. You then use that self deceiving technique as proof to yourself. The failure is your inability to find the God of our experience. The truest and only proof of our experience with God is in the lives that we live.

But we cannot prove God to the satisfaction of the doubters mind who us unwilling to seek God himself. It seems you should have figured that out long ago. So, what you need is another hobby.
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,593
Northern Ohio
✟314,607.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Not only would I suggest that. I'ld flat out tell you that.
Indeed, there was no Noah, no ark filled with animals and most certainly no global flood.
We know that there was no Global flood. At least the is overwelming evidence that there is no Global flood. But you have zip, zero, no evidence to show that Noah was not a real person and that there was not a real Ark. IF Noah was a pretend story then there should be just as much evidence to that as there is that the flood was NOT global. If the Ringling Brothers could put their whole circus on a train then Noah could put his whole traveling show in a boat. He just built a boat big enough for his family and all the animals on his farm.
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,593
Northern Ohio
✟314,607.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
They love to build a straw men argument then defeat their own argument. They love to argue with themselves. Often I agree with them. For example when they tell me their concept of God I agree that their concept of God does not exist. They do not know the God of the Bible. They are fully convinced though. The question is what are they fully convinced of or in. I am fully convinced also. This is exactly what God wants is for: " Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind."
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married

You make a good point, Atheist do often have an immature God concept that they yearn for in contrast to the true God of mystery, with a far reaching plan, that requires patience, trust and faith.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,217
52,662
Guam
✟5,155,369.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The [fallen] sons of God, who wrote this in 1955, know it is called "Completion of the Scriptures."
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
We know that there was no Global flood.

And we also know that regional floods happen practically every day somewhere on the planet and thus do not require any supernatural shenannigans.

At least the is overwelming evidence that there is no Global flood.

It's so overwhelming that it's safe to call it a fact that no such flood ever took place.

But you have zip, zero, no evidence to show that Noah was not a real person and that there was not a real Ark.

The burden of proof concerning that claim is in your court.
It's upto you to prove that such a person and boat existed. Failing to meet that burden is enough for me to dissmiss it at face value. Especially since it concerns such a wild and extra-ordinary claim.

IF Noah was a pretend story then there should be just as much evidence to that as there is that the flood was NOT global.

No. In fact, it's not so that there is evidence that there was no such flood. There's no such thing as "evidence for the non-existance" of anything.

The thing is, from the flood story follows a number of testable predictions. If those predictions don't check out, the story is false.

The "evidence against the flood" that we speak of here is thus not actual evidence in support of the negative claim... Nope. What it actually is, is the absence of evidence FOR the positive claim.

For example, the "global flood" story makes 2 obvious predictions:
- a genetic bottleneck in all animals
- a global flood layer of sediments dating to the same period of the bottleneck.

Neither of both exist. And THAT is how we factually know that the story is false.

The only way we can come up with similar evidence against noah and his boat, is if those claims make similar testable predictions. If not, it's just yet another faith-based claim that has no supportive evidence in reality.

Having said that....
Noah and his boat are an integral part of the factually wrong global flood story.
So unless you have any actual extra-biblical evidence for noah or his boat, I see no reason to not consider those parts of the story equally debunked as the water-all-over-the-world bit.

If the Ringling Brothers could put their whole circus on a train then Noah could put his whole traveling show in a boat. He just built a boat big enough for his family and all the animals on his farm.

Yes, that is the (religious) claim.

Now try to support it with actual evidence that is not just about repeating the claim.
 
Reactions: bhsmte
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
The [fallen] sons of God, who wrote this in 1955, know it is called "Completion of the Scriptures."

The Urantia revelation wasn't written by "fallen Sons", it was undertaken under the authority of Christ.

Again, I recall the enemies of Jesus suffered from a similar paranoia.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Atheist dogma hunters choose questions that can't be answered without subjectively experiencing it yourself.

I don't know what that means.


You then use that self deceiving technique as proof to yourself. The failure is your inability to find the God of our experience. The truest and only proof of our experience with God is in the lives that we live.

I don't know what this means either.

But we cannot prove God to the satisfaction of the doubters mind who us unwilling to seek God himself.

If god objectively and factually exists, then why can't you show that to be the case?
Why must I first believe it in order to find justification for believing it?

It makes zero sense.

It seems you should have figured that out long ago. So, what you need is another hobby.

What you need, is understanding how the burden of proof works.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

You must not be talking about me, because I have never given any "god concept" on this site, since I don't have such a concept.

And I know very well of what I am convinced....

I am convinced of the fact that you can't meet your burden of proof for the religious claims that you make.

I am open to be shown wrong on that point and have repeatedly invited people to show me how I'm wrong on that point.

None has ever succeeded. Perhaps you will be the first.
Try it.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
You make a good point, Atheist do often have an immature God concept that they yearn for in contrast to the true God of mystery, with a far reaching plan, that requires patience, trust and faith.

I have no concept of god because I am not a theist. I don't require a concept of god.

I can only go by the concept of gods presented to me by the theists I talk to.

And I'ld like to add that the number of "god concepts" presented to me in the past, comes very close to the number of theists I have spoken with.

Theists can't even agree amongst themselves on "god concepts" (hence all the denominations and different religions out there), so you can hardly hold it against atheists that they don't happen to share the "god concept" that YOU happen to believe in.

If theists themselves can't even agree on what god is, what makes you think atheists will agree with your personal idea on what god is?
 
Reactions: bhsmte
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,217
52,662
Guam
✟5,155,369.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The Urantia revelation wasn't written by "fallen Sons",
Yes, it was.

Just like A Course in Miracles was written.

Not to mention the song, Stairway to Heaven.

My guess is: automatic handwriting.

(And why did you capitalize "sons"?)
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟35,675.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

I quote them as indicative of the beliefs of Darwinist evolution. Sorta like their 'bible'.


"Descent with modification" is 'change by random mutation'.....a cornerstone of Darwinist evolution. Willy-nillyness.
 
Upvote 0