Here's my problem, I believe in evolution, and it brings up doubts especially in the OT...

[Subduction Zone]

Why?? Because --no proof is needed for false accusations to be acceptable to atheists and agnostics???????

You seem to be admitting that the principles of evolutionism pervade your entire thinking - in general. Are you saying that such a transparent MO on your part would be acceptable to Christians?? Ever??

You stated that the accusations were false. If you were smart you would have simply demanded that someone show that you are wrong. But by accusing others you have done what others did to you. You made an accusation, if you cannot back it up then your claim that the accusations are false holds no water.

Meanwhile I gave you a more than reasonable offer on your quote mines. Why did you ignore it? An honest person would have leaped at the offer. That does not look very good for your side.

 

[Loudmouth]

Here is evidence from one of your own atheist scientists

Those are quote mines, not evidence.

When you can't deal with the evidence you twist the words of others. The typical type of dishonesty that we see from creationists.

 

[BobRyan]

I frankly could not care less what any evolutionary scientist has to say on the matter.

Dawkins could go in front of a crowd, say evolution is a lie and the bible was right all along, and then proceed to shoot himself, and I would only say "huh, I always thought that if he died by gunshot, someone else would be firing the gun".

What have I said about Dawkins in this discussion that has lead you to imagine that he had no credibility on the point about which I referenced him??

In fact what did I say about him that made it appear in the least way that it was opposed to your own atheist/agnostic position about the Bible and evolution?

I think that just now - you cannot think of a thing that I have said where Dawkins made a statement on a point where did not have credibility.

And I say this as a Bible believing Christians that has a great many things I can quote from Dawkins where he has made blunder after blunder -- but not on this thread.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You stated that the accusations were false. If you were smart you would have simply demanded that someone show that you are wrong. But by accusing others you have done what others did to you. You made an accusation, if you cannot back it up then your claim that the accusations are false holds no water.

Meanwhile I gave you a more than reasonable offer on your quote mines. Why did you ignore it? An honest person would have leaped at the offer. That does not look very good for your side.

Question, meet Answer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Question, meet Answer.

I feel that quote mining is one of the worst forms of lying. Quite often people do not even realize that they are lying since they never read the original source, and they believe the dishonest sources that they got the quote mines from. And just think what that means if the Christian belief is true. If that is the case they are lying by proxy at the very least and will not ever ask for forgiveness of that particular sin. I do believe for most sects of Christianity one must for forgiveness to be forgiven.

If the Jesus story of the Bible is true they are putting their souls at risk to defend a false idea.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I feel that quote mining is one of the worst forms of lying. Quite often people do not even realize that they are lying since they never read the original source, and they believe the dishonest sources that they got the quote mines from. And just think what that means if the Christian belief is true. If that is the case they are lying by proxy at the very least and will not ever ask for forgiveness of that particular sin. I do believe for most sects of Christianity one must for forgiveness to be forgiven.

If the Jesus story of the Bible is true they are putting their souls at risk to defend a false idea.

A quote miner is, as I say, the worst kind of liar -- an untalented one. In this age of Google, how hard is it really to find the truth? Quote miners either are exceptionally lazy or counting on their audience to be.

 

[JoeP222w]

2 Peter 1:19-21 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, (20) knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. (21) For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

 

[BobRyan]

I feel that quote mining is one of the worst forms of lying.

I feel that false accusation and just plain "makin' stuff up" whenever blind faith evolutionism cannot respond to comments from ITs OWN atheist scientists -- is the worst form of lying.

Clearly - we differ.

 

[BobRyan]

2 Peter 1:19-21 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, (20) knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. (21) For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

So then you are arguing in favor of believing the Bible - over evolution?

Some of the recent agnostic and atheist posts on this thread are likely to differ with that POV in favor of belief in Darwinism -- instead.

Still I have to agree with you - that the Word of God - is the better way to go.

 

[BobRyan]

You stated that the accusations were false. If you were smart you would have simply demanded that someone show that you are wrong. .

A distinction without a difference - merely for the sake of ad hominem gaming?... again??

I stated that they were factless - as all readers can see - those accusations offered no fact at all. Those making them - asked that I kindly help them find facts to support their ad hominem posts.
I stated that they were false - because they themselves admit they have not done the research - and I myself ... have.

The point remains.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I feel that false accusation and just plain "makin' stuff up" whenever blind faith evolutionism cannot respond to comments from ITs OWN atheist scientists -- is the worst form of lying.

Clearly - we differ.

We don't have to lie since the facts are all on our side. Name a supposed lie of evolution. I am pretty sure that you will fail.

 

[BobRyan]

that the accusations are false holds no water.
Meanwhile I gave you a more than reasonable offer on your quote mines. Why did you ignore it? An honest person would have .

Indeed you "offered to just say 'nay' to anything I find" while you on your part "find nothing" but rather reduce your contribution to simple name-calling and more false accusations.

Which of course is all the evolutionist has to "contribute" so not saying you could have done better. Just saying that you don't seem to have a leg to stand on when it comes to this subject.

We don't have to lie since the facts are all on our side.

This from the person asking me to find some facts to support your false accusations??

I am not arguing that atheists would find that sort of antic on your part to be unacceptable -- but how can you be so certain that all readers will be leaning towards atheism??

 

[Subduction Zone]

A distinction without a difference - merely for the sake of ad hominem gaming?... again??

Wrong again. Your actions shifted the burden of proof back onto you. You made a positive claim instead of merely demanding evidence.

I stated that they were factless - as all readers can see - those accusations offered no fact at all. Those making them - asked that I kindly help them find facts to support their ad hominem posts.
I stated that they were false - because they themselves admit they have not done the research - and I myself ... have.

Right, you stated that they were factless. Now you have to demonstrate that. You don't seem to understand what "factless" means. It does not mean "not supported by facts". Then it would have been more properly stated by you as "unsupported attacks".

The point remains.

Nope, you failed terribly. And I see that you are still running away from my serious challenge. I guess that putting your money where your mouth is is a bit too scary for you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Indeed you "offered to just say 'nay' to anything I find" while you on your part "find nothing" but rather reduce your contribution to simple name-calling and more false accusations.

Wrong again. I offered to find an instance where your quotes were quote mined. I did not make that simple claim. You are not being honest.

Which of course is all the evolutionist has to "contribute" so not saying you could have done better. Just saying that you don't seem to have a leg to stand on when it comes to this subject.

Please watch the dishonesty and personal attacks. I offered to show you how at least one of your quotes was a quote mine. You claimed to have read the originals and understood them. I find this claim highly dubious.

So are you up to the challenge or are you simply going to engage in more trollish behavior. I offered to support my claims which is much more than you have ever done.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Indeed you "offered to just say 'nay' to anything I find" while you on your part "find nothing" but rather reduce your contribution to simple name-calling and more false accusations.

Which of course is all the evolutionist has to "contribute" so not saying you could have done better. Just saying that you don't seem to have a leg to stand on when it comes to this subject.

Wrong again. I offered to support my claim. Here you are nattering about a difference that does not matter and this is a huge difference that does matter.

This from the person asking me to find some facts to support your false accusations??

What false accusations? You see you need to watch what you say. Once again you put the burden of proof upon you. If you can't show my accusations to be false now you are the one clearly in the wrong. You took the burden of proof off of my shoulders and put it upon yours. And yes, I know that all of the evidence is on the side of evolution. Or to be more precise, no creationist has ever shown any evidence against the theory of evolution.

I am not arguing that atheists would find that sort of antic on your part to be unacceptable -- but how can you be so certain that all readers will be leaning towards atheism??

What antic? I am willing to support my claims. You seem to be afraid to do the same. Unfortunately since I have been waiting for some time for you to support your claims you are in no position to make any demands of me. When you support the claims that I have brought up then you can ask me for support for my claims.

 

[Loudmouth]

I feel that false accusation and just plain "makin' stuff up" whenever blind faith evolutionism cannot respond to comments from ITs OWN atheist scientists -- is the worst form of lying.

Why don't you respond to this Bible verse:

"There is no God"--Psalm 14:1

 

[PsychoSarah]

What have I said about Dawkins in this discussion that has lead you to imagine that he had no credibility on the point about which I referenced him??

Nothing, but his tactlessness makes him a popular quote mine, and, ultimately, the opinions of one man are irrelevant. He hasn't disproved evolution, so why should I give a crap about what he says, regardless as to whether or not it is a quote mine? Also, fyi, I hate the man anyways, so I suggest that you not bring him up while in a debate with me. Rage makes me act... rude.

In fact what did I say about him that made it appear in the least way that it was opposed to your own atheist/agnostic position about the Bible and evolution?

The fact that you think that atheists have any universal views on the bible or evolution is a problem. Here is my biggest issue with people like him: I am an agnostic atheist SEEKER. I have been seeking belief for over 7 years. Dawkins has, and continues to, make money off of DESTROYING BELIEF. His arguments in philosophy aren't even all that good either. How would I not hate a person who makes money off of destroying that which I seek to have? Especially considering that I can't even respect him for being good at it. It makes it all the worse that, for whatever reason, so many theists view this guy as the ruler of atheists or some nonsense, as if he is atheist Jesus. Nothing about what you have said makes me opposed to him, but I dislike him immensely for other reasons. Does he have expert level knowledge on evolution? Yes, yes he does. But, he has absolutely no such grace in matters of philosophy or religion, and never watches his tongue. A big way in which I disagree with him, is that I don't view religion as generally harmful or a crutch for the weak or ignorant. And I will never respect anyone with that kind of mindset.

I think that just now - you cannot think of a thing that I have said where Dawkins made a statement on a point where did not have credibility.

It's prior knowledge on the guy that I have that is the problem, not anything you brought up. Mentioning him just generally makes me angry.

And I say this as a Bible believing Christians that has a great many things I can quote from Dawkins where he has made blunder after blunder -- but not on this thread.

That would be because he is socially stupid, and that is something coming from me. I actually have a social disorder, and I wouldn't make some of the mistakes he does. To be fair, some of the mistakes I make he likely would not be as prone to, such as angry outbursts, but the fact that this relatively incompetent man is now considered by many people to be representative of atheism makes my blood boil.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Yet you argue in favor of factless accusations -- merely because those accusations are "against' inconvenient details in the many-storied book of evolution"-- statements that do not appear to be flattering to blind faith evolutionism??

To me, they aren't factless, but an explanation of observations better than any other. There is plenty that isn't flattering to evolution that I do recognize; just none of what you are bringing up. Evolution supporters converting to creationism is irrelevant if it isn't because objective observations support it. If you just say they do it, and give a vague piece about "how they interpret it", I will not care, because that will mean their change of opinion is more likely than not to be highly subjective. That is, if they aren't outright quote mines. As an example that doesn't flatter evolution: it is impossible to know which, if any, of the fossilized species we have discovered are actually direct ancestors to humans, or any other modern species, because excluding rare cases such as with the Neanderthals, no DNA is preserved. Isn't acknowledging that acknowledging an inconvenient truth? Not that this disproves evolution by any means, but it certainly doesn't sound very flattering. I hope you use it in some debates; it'll at least show that you are informed to a degree about evolution. Also, it should concern you that more creationists don't bring it up.

Then you have a gold mine of a religion - it provides an endless supply of that sort of thing.

Nah, if I want a gold mine of inconvenience, I can check out physics. Biology is very consistent, especially by comparison.

Correction -- You could not "care less about any non-positive statements , unflattering to belief in evolutionism - that might be made by any evolutionary scientist".

I don't care about their positive opinions either, honestly. I don't care about their opinions. What I care about is data.

You have free will - if the lake of fire is so wonderful - so enticing that not even the "revelations" from your own atheist evolutionists are sufficient wake-up calls. Far be it from me to dissuade you from your free will choice. I respect your right to make that choice. But I would hate to have you do so - totally uniformed about the fact that even your own atheist scientists are known to admit to a few 'non-flattering details' -

Sir, I have been a seeker of faith for over 7 years. I assure you, belief is not a fully conscious choice. If it was, I would be marked Christian, or perhaps general theist. Try making yourself believe the sky is gold with silver stripes, and tell me how well you do with that. No matter who you are, you need some degree of evidence to put stock in anything. I just have an extremely skeptical mind to fight against compared to you. Well, and I wasn't indoctrinated as a child.

Also, I just gave you a non flattering detail myself. Admission that evolution is not perfect doesn't make creationism right, or even better by default.

Furthermore, I find the cessation of existence I believe death to be far more terrifying than any lake of fire.

And I think you will agree with me - the the guy posting in the OP -- may not be all that excited about also leaping into the Rev 20 lake of fire.

I would be. Complete nonexistence terrifies me more than any negative afterlife could. Not that all atheists don't believe in an afterlife, but that is the case with me. You have no idea, the dread I feel, as I crawl closer to nonexistence with every fraction of a second that passes. That I will live to see many of the people I love and care about cease to be, before I follow them into oblivion.

But a great many on this board - prefer eternal life that comes with acceptance of the Bible.

Here's the problem: I don't believe that will happen for anyone, regardless of belief. I would very much like to believe that, but as of yet, seeking belief has not lead to me obtaining it.

 

[PsychoSarah]

On a side note the "shocking discovery" that false factless accusations do not become 'true' simply because they are made - is a bit of a reality shock for some.

Quote mines are exceedingly common. It would be nice if you linked your sources for your quotes, that way, I could determine if they are quote mines or not. If they aren't, I'll apologise, and personally endorse you as reliable and trustworthy. If they are and you made a mistake, I'll show you the error so you don't make it again. The only possibility that would make you scared of fact checking is if you were quote mining on purpose.

I have read the material -- others here have not - rather they make their factless false accusation then expect me to do their research for them and then post it to try and help support their 'resort to false accusation when you have no data' solutions for blind faith evolutionism.

Just give us links to your sources of quotes. That act alone will promote your intent to be fair and honest. If it is hard to track down the exact sources, surely others exist for the quotes. All you would need to do is copy and paste them into the search bar of Google. The reason I don't do this myself is that I would rather know what type of source you consider reliable. We want the material so that we can read it, and confirm that what you say is accurate. This isn't us accusing you of lying or being dishonest, but rather a formality we have to go through in order to view anyone as trustworthy.

I was not quoting anti-evolutionists or creationists - these are all diehard evolutionists. Your implied argument that nobody should notice any inconvenient or less-than-flattering-details in evolutionism ... is "instructive".

Not so, in fact, that many of the actual flaws in evolution go unmentioned in debates is discouraging. It means that many of the people arguing against it don't have an extensive enough background in the topic to debate against it effectively.

Why?? Because --no proof is needed for false accusations to be acceptable to atheists and agnostics???????

Of course not, but I do not recall making any false accusations. Not any on purpose. I stated that what you are presenting may be a quote mine. In these debates, such tactics are so common, that you need to demonstrate that you aren't doing it. If you do that much, we won't bring it up anymore. It does you no service to complain.

You seem to be admitting that the principles of evolutionism pervade your entire thinking - in general. Are you saying that such a transparent MO on your part would be acceptable to Christians?? Ever??

I am not an evolution defender, but a person that dislikes ignorant and flawed arguments. True, I do support evolution, but I am not on here to convince anyone that said perspective is superior to any other. Also, a lot of Christians do support evolution, so you should say creationists instead.

 

[BobRyan]

I frankly could not care less what any evolutionary scientist has to say on the matter.

Dawkins could go in front of a crowd, say evolution is a lie and the bible was right all along, and then proceed to shoot himself, and I would only say "huh, I always thought that if he died by gunshot, someone else would be firing the gun".

What have I said about Dawkins in this discussion that has lead you to imagine that he had no credibility on the point about which I referenced him??

In fact what did I say about him that made it appear in the least way that it was opposed to your own atheist/agnostic position about the Bible and evolution?

I think that just now - you cannot think of a thing that I have said where Dawkins made a statement on a point where did not have credibility.

And I say this as a Bible believing Christians that has a great many things I can quote from Dawkins where he has made blunder after blunder -- but not on this thread.

Nothing, but his tactlessness makes him a popular quote mine, and, ultimately, the opinions of one man are irrelevant. He hasn't disproved evolution, so why should I give a crap

Your fear of the details -- "noted".

I did not quote Dawkins claiming to have disproven evolution at all. My reference to him was that he strongly endorses it.

The "salient point" of the reference -- that you are not even addressing -- is that he is one of many that admit that his belief in evolution is what drove him to reject his Christian faith - faith that he was raised with. It is his own personal testimony that I reference and not at all referencing his usual rude remarks on various subjects related to religion. You are so carelessly trashing this simple obvious point as if it is 'more evil quote mine against my faith in evolutionism' for the sake of fear of the details.

You have yet to show how he could not possibly have any credibility about his own testimony of what happened to him.

about what he says, regardless as to whether or not it is a quote mine? Also, fyi, I hate the man anyways, so I suggest that you not bring him up while in a debate with me. Rage makes me act... rude.

Again I would argue that your over-the-top response to the fact that Dawkins claims that like Darwin he too gave up Christianity for his belief in evolutionism -- is indicative of a problem in evolutionism more than anything that Dawkins said about his own testimony.

The fact that you think that atheists have any universal views on the bible or evolution is a problem. Here is my biggest issue with people like him: I am an agnostic atheist SEEKER. I have been seeking belief for over 7 years. Dawkins has, and continues to, make money off of DESTROYING BELIEF. His arguments in philosophy aren't even all that good either. How would I not hate a person who makes money off of destroying that which I seek to have? Especially considering that I can't even respect him for being good at it. It makes it all the worse that, for whatever reason, so many theists view this guy as the ruler of atheists or some nonsense, as if he is atheist Jesus. Nothing about what you have said makes me opposed to him, but I dislike him immensely for other reasons. Does he have expert level knowledge on evolution? Yes, yes he does. But, he has absolutely no such grace in matters of philosophy or religion, and never watches his tongue.

Certainly I agree that he is rude in many of his quotes. But my reference to him on this thread is not at all about him being rude - just that he gives his own experience - his own testimony about how being brought up as a Christian - ended for him when he accepted belief in evolutionism's doctrine on origins and life.

A big way in which I disagree with him, is that I don't view religion as generally harmful or a crutch for the weak or ignorant.

Certainly I agree with you on that - but I am not quoting or referencing him on this thread in regard to his great many statements on that idea. I was just referencing his own everyday sort of statement that more than one or two atheists on this board would also affirm - they gave up their Christianity when they accepted faith in evolutionism.

From my POV - they "changed religions" - though they themselves seldom say it that way.

in Christ,

Bob