How much longer?

[DDan]

Why have people claimed you're Consol? Are you?

Do you ever have any thoughts that are your own?

What do you want me to say? if I deny it no one will believe me and if I say yes I will be banned, I can't win,
are you Consol or not? you are very naive?

PS. What is/was Consol anyway? why do so many people dislike him? even the American atheists don't like him, I take it he wasn't American, did he think religion is as destructive and dislike it as much as I do?

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Do you ever have any thoughts that are your own?
What do you want me to say? if I deny it no one will believe me and if I say yes I will be banned, I can't win,
are you Consol or not? you are very naive?

PS. What is/was Consol anyway? why do so many people dislike him? even the American atheists don't like him, I take it he wasn't American, did he think religion is as destructive and dislike it as much as I do?

I have many thoughts of my own but I don't always invest the time expressing them in depth on internet forums, especially when I may or may not be engaging with an infamous troll. I politely and efficiently responded to you when I had no obligation to, and I asked you a very basic question in a civil tone; you responded with unnecessary juvenile snide.

You can do a simple keyword search of Consol.

Consol is pure, concentrated vitriol with a butt so massively hurt I imagine that he must stand every hour of the day. Having limited patience is not the same as not having any.

Consol is a person who has the "honor" of being the most hardcore antitheist who bothers to keep coming back to this site periodically. He uses different names and accounts, but his brand of rudeness is so distinctive that we can always tell it is him, and then he gets banned within a week of his return. He is aggressively rude to theists and any atheist that bothers to challenge his behavior. Consol, I would guess, would be his original username, but I wasn't a member when he started, so I am not sure.

Some people have no lives, it wouldn't shock me if he makes his angry presence known on a multitude of sites relating to discussion about religion.

If you feel like religion is destructive and dislike it so intensely that you cannot conduct yourself in a mature and civil way, then joining a Christian forum seems to be a disrespectful decision not just to the community but to yourself and your time. There are many atheists and agnostics on this forum who are very respected and contribute a lot here, and I am contacts with several of them. They don't radiate hostility. They are far more effective at communicating and actually providing knowledge and ideas that resonate with others. You seem to be the sort that people are apt to put on their ignore list, not because of what you believe, but because of how you behave.

 

[DDan]

I have many thoughts of my own but I don't always invest the time expressing them in depth on internet forums, especially when I may or may not be engaging with an infamous troll. I politely and efficiently responded to you when I had no obligation to, and I asked you a very basic question in a civil tone; you responded with unnecessary juvenile snide.

You can do a simple keyword search of Consol.

If you feel like religion is destructive and dislike it so intensely that you cannot conduct yourself in a mature and civil way, then joining a Christian forum seems to be a disrespectful decision not just to the community but to yourself and your time. There are many atheists and agnostics on this forum who are very respected and contribute a lot here, and I am contacts with several of them. They don't radiate hostility. They are far more effective at communicating and actually providing knowledge and ideas that resonate with others. You seem to be the sort that people are apt to put on their ignore list, not because of what you believe, but because of how you behave.

For my part I am not angry at creationist, I only feel sorry for them, I realise they can not help themselves and that's why I feel sorry for them.
Like Consol I am antitheist because I feel religions damage more people than they help, how much damage would you say Islam does or do you think it's a force for good?
Muslims pray five times a day unless it's a female on her period when she is not allowed to pray, does that sound man made to you? how much of Christianity is man made, all of it? none of it or just some of it.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

The concept of our existence being more than a sack of chemicals driven by chemical reactions is contrary to Darwinist evolution though. Something beyond ourselves, outside of ourselves, then exists and we are more than a sack of chemicals driven by chemical reactions.

I think you reversed yourself here. you are the one that was stating that Darwinism made us only a sack of chemicals. Now you are saying it is contrary to that. No matter what there is a maner in which the body and mind work and that which is produced by each. Most of it is electrical as far as I understand.

While Christians losing their lives for the gospel is a tragedy, the teaching of Darwinism is also a tragedy. While one takes the life of an individual, their soul lives on. On the other hand, Darwinism may spare the life but will destroy the soul.

The teaching of Darwinism is no tradegy. It is something to bounce the thery of creation against. It is a thought counter to ours and as such is something that we must try to pull others away, but do you really think that you doing all that assuming without any solid evidence is going to get you anywhere. Science is not a philosophical discipline and has nothing to do with our feelings about it.

Belief is simply that and we must use that with the Lord has given us to use to countret what the world has become. If you think you can assualt science with emotionalism you are outmatched and person up a creek without a paddle.

Darwinist evolution rejects God and rejecting God has dire consequences.

It offers and alternative to religion and that is fine with me. Science has opened up knowledge that we never had before. It is not evil to think and come up with a theory that is counter to ours. It is Evil to force others to adhere to anyone's beliefs.

I would suggest you interact in the manner you deem appropriate and I'll interact in the manner I deem appropriate.

You said you would like to hear from Athiests and I offered you a valid suggestion. If you like breaking your head against a wall of resentment then do so. I would ask you what Jesus would do, because he sat down with people counter to him and I bet he didn't use the tactics you are using.

Like always there is a way to talk to people and there is ways not to. If you wish to browbeat so you personally can say that you defended something then that is on you. Please go after all the glory you seek. It is all about you, isn't it. Do you really think that making a specitcal has ever worked anywhere except for the media to use as an image they can toss back at us?

Darwinism is atheistic creationist pseudo-science and is in direct opposition to God and His word.

It is a counter idea that conforms to the ideology that we have. It is simply that and should be taken as it is. What do you think a thery is. Is it proven, no, but it does have evidence to support it.

Pick just one of the 15.

Ok said that you were using this Chemicals in a bag and you said you weren't after I stated firmly how you were going about it.

Also I stated your intent in doing what you were doinuing because it was obvious to anyone who had read your posts what you were trying to set up and you countered with the statement that I said you didn't say that. Intent is not stated, that is why the word intent is apart of the vocabulary.

God was involved in the creation of mankind (as well as all creation) before we were born.

The journey is the experince any individual heas in growing up as a human being.


Quote]

{/quote]

And this is wrong how?

Point out the part which isn't valid and give your reason why it's not valid.

The idea that mankind according to Darwinism is nothing but a sack of chemicals.

That's in the realm of apologetics and that's not allowed on this part of the forum. I certainly don't mind discussing it, but admins have pointed out frequently that's not a subject which is allowed here.

We are not in any way involved in any punishment because we are not the creator. If you were a parent and had two children. One older than the other and the younger was caught and punish for not obeying you, would you not tell the older child that it is not his station to punish your son, because he also is your son.

It has nothing to do with appologist. It is comon sence and did not God give us that.? We all know intrinsically what is right and wrong. Some simply ignore that because they feel they are intitled or they think there is something greater to gain as opposed to the consequences of their actions.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

For my part I am not angry at creationist, I only feel sorry for them, I realise they can not help themselves and that's why I feel sorry for them.
Like Consol I am antitheist because I feel religions damage more people than they help, how much damage would you say Islam does or do you think it's a force for good?
Muslims pray five times a day unless it's a female on her period when she is not allowed to pray, does that sound man made to you? how much of Christianity is man made, all of it? none of it or just some of it.

Is it the idea of so many who try to force others to adhere to the values of their faiththat makes it damaging or is it the fact that others have found something they would rather believe in?

 

[DDan]

Is it the idea of so many who try to force others to adhere to the values of their faiththat makes it damaging or is it the fact that others have found something they would rather believe in?

None of those things, anyone who would advocate belief in something for which there is no evidence has more troubles than the person they are talking to, unless of course they are doing it for gain.
In what other parts of their lives do they believe something before they have a reasonable proof that it's true, would they buy a car before seeing it or unless someone they trust has seen it? if they are prepared to believe something they have read about in a book why stop with just Christianity? what's wrong with all the other religions why don't they believe them?
we both know why don't we? it was the luck of the draw, which means none of them are the one true religion.
Had you all been born to Muslims in a Muslim community you would all now be Muslims, it's as simple as that.
Why none of you can grasp this idea is beyond me.

 

[DerelictJunction]

I agree, everything we imagine disappears when our brains shut down. If our existence as a person is simply an illusion created by a certain construct of our brain through a random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless process, (Darwinist evolution view), then all of our actions are simply chemical reactions. Morality, immorality, love, empthay...etc....doesn't really exist no more than we exist. It's all because of some evolved behavior, predetermined 'programming'.

On the other hand, if we're more than that, one must find the source for one's existence. The source would have to be outside 'us', would have to be supernatural. Finding that supernatural source is what billions have claimed to have found.

It's up to each individual to determine who they are, simply a bag of chemicals with only chemical reactions being the determinate concerning their existence or are they more than that? Is there something outside themselves which determines who they are.

Is this simply a restatement of Pascal's wager?

Apparently you don't think that finding out what is true has any value. According to you it is belief rather than truth which is important. Belief begets gods.
Interesting philosophy.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

None of those things, anyone who would advocate belief in something for which there is no evidence has more troubles than the person they are talking to, unless of course they are doing it for gain.

Do you live in the heads and the hearts of others? When you speak of destructiveness you speak to your own assumptions of what would happen to you if you believed so and since you, yourself have no evidence of that I would ask you not to condemn those you claim believe something in which they too have no evidence.

In what other parts of their lives do they believe something before they have a reasonable proof that it's true, would they buy a car before seeing it or unless someone they trust has seen it? if they are prepared to believe something they have read about in a book why stop with just Christianity? what's wrong with all the other religions why don't they believe them?

There are many ideologies that have been apart of human nature that people believe just because they oppose a person or a group that someone else has said something against. If you talk about the far left to the far right or the far right about the far left their has never always been those who believe their opposite number capable of anything. They need no proof, only someone saying that they did something.

we both know why don't we? it was the luck of the draw, which means none of them are the one true religion.
Had you all been born to Muslims in a Muslim community you would all now be Muslims, it's as simple as that.

I think the word we is misused here. We, normally extends pass your own nostrils. Are you saying that others agree with you. I'm sure there are but I would rather know it from their lips. As far as being Muslim, I have no idea what I'd be as at one time i left the Christian church because of the hypocrisy in there and was an Atheist until I learned from experience that there was just as many haters in there as there is in Christianity. People take things to the extreams they wish. Some to the shaking of the head and some take over their whole life. I fear the latter far more than anything else because that places everyone else in the expendable column.

Why none of you can grasp this idea is beyond me.

That is because we are all different and have a need to express ourselves to others.

 

[AV1611VET]

if I deny it no one will believe me and if I say yes I will be banned, I can't win,

You know that isn't true, don't you?

 

[Loudmouth]

Do you ever have any thoughts that are your own?

What do you want me to say? if I deny it no one will believe me and if I say yes I will be banned, I can't win,
are you Consol or not? you are very naive?

PS. What is/was Consol anyway? why do so many people dislike him? even the American atheists don't like him, I take it he wasn't American, did he think religion is as destructive and dislike it as much as I do?

You are using the same exact arguments and insults that consol always used.

 

[justlookinla]

I think you reversed yourself here. you are the one that was stating that Darwinism made us only a sack of chemicals.

Darwinism is nothing more than a faith-based view of how all life we observe today was produced.

Now you are saying it is contrary to that.

You need to read what I wrote again......

"The concept of our existence being more than a sack of chemicals driven by chemical reactions is contrary to Darwinist evolution though. Something beyond ourselves, outside of ourselves, then exists and we are more than a sack of chemicals driven by chemical reactions."​

No matter what there is a maner in which the body and mind work and that which is produced by each. Most of it is electrical as far as I understand.

No doubt the firing of synapses are an important part of consciousness, but we're more than simply the firing of synapses. We have supernatural interaction as well.

The teaching of Darwinism is no tradegy.

I disagree. The worldview produced by Darwinsm is contrary to God's truths. That's a tragedy.

It is something to bounce the thery of creation against. It is a thought counter to ours and as such is something that we must try to pull others away, but do you really think that you doing all that assuming without any solid evidence is going to get you anywhere. Science is not a philosophical discipline and has nothing to do with our feelings about it.

I agree, but Darwinism isn't science. It's faith-based pseudo-science producing a message of a Godless creation.

Belief is simply that and we must use that with the Lord has given us to use to countret what the world has become. If you think you can assualt science with emotionalism you are outmatched and person up a creek without a paddle.

One must differentiate between science and pseudo-science.

It offers and alternative to religion and that is fine with me. Science has opened up knowledge that we never had before.

Darwinism is the humanist religion wrapped in pseudo-science.

It is not evil to think and come up with a theory that is counter to ours. It is Evil to force others to adhere to anyone's belief

It's evil to teach anything contrary to God's word.

You said you would like to hear from Athiests and I offered you a valid suggestion. If you like breaking your head against a wall of resentment then do so.

I've been hearing from atheists for quite a while. I'm sure I'll continue to hear from atheists and their Godless belief systems.

I would ask you what Jesus would do, because he sat down with people counter to him and I bet he didn't use the tactics you are using.

Jesus would correct error.

Like always there is a way to talk to people and there is ways not to. If you wish to browbeat so you personally can say that you defended something then that is on you. Please go after all the glory you seek. It is all about you, isn't it. Do you really think that making a specitcal has ever worked anywhere except for the media to use as an image they can toss back at us?

Feel better now?

It is a counter idea that conforms to the ideology that we have. It is simply that and should be taken as it is. What do you think a thery is. Is it proven, no, but it does have evidence to support it.

If Christianity is correct, then Darwinism is not just a 'counter idea' but an idea promoted by the prince of darkness which is anti-Christ (per scripture).

Ok said that you were using this Chemicals in a bag and you said you weren't after I stated firmly how you were going about it.

Also I stated your intent in doing what you were doinuing because it was obvious to anyone who had read your posts what you were trying to set up and you countered with the statement that I said you didn't say that. Intent is not stated, that is why the word intent is apart of the vocabulary.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

The journey is the experince any individual heas in growing up as a human being.

The journey of Darwinism is a Godless one.

And this is wrong how?

This is the scientific method. Nothing wrong with it.

The idea that mankind according to Darwinism is nothing but a sack of chemicals.

If Darwinist believe that mankind is more, I'd certainly be interesting in seeing their arguments. So far, nothing.

We are not in any way involved in any punishment because we are not the creator. If you were a parent and had two children. One older than the other and the younger was caught and punish for not obeying you, would you not tell the older child that it is not his station to punish your son, because he also is your son.

It has nothing to do with appologist. It is comon sence and did not God give us that.? We all know intrinsically what is right and wrong. Some simply ignore that because they feel they are intitled or they think there is something greater to gain as opposed to the consequences of their actions.

No, this is getting into the area of apoligetics. Admins have pointed out several times that's not allowed in this area of the forum so I'm not going there. You can continue if you wish without me concerning the topic of punishment.

 

[justlookinla]

Is this simply a restatement of Pascal's wager?

I don't think so.

Apparently you don't think that finding out what is true has any value.

I think that finding out what is true is paramount in one's worldview. It's of extreme importance.

According to you it is belief rather than truth which is important. Belief begets gods.
Interesting philosophy.

Belief begets Godless creation also. Ultimately, the truth is the quest.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

Darwinism is nothing more than a faith-based view of how all life we observe today was produced.

What do you think a theory is? It is not just a basless assumption determined on which side of the bed you fall out of. It is a well thought out evidence driven conclustion to how we came to being what we are today. It is not faith-based anything.

You need to read what I wrote again......

"The concept of our existence being more than a sack of chemicals driven by chemical reactions is contrary to Darwinist evolution though. Something beyond ourselves, outside of ourselves, then exists and we are more than a sack of chemicals driven by chemical reactions."​

Ok, I missed your meaning here and I apologize for that. That being said there is nothing to state that there is not anything more than a bag of chemicals involved in evolution. In order for you to know this you would have to be God.​

No doubt the firing of synapses are an important part of consciousness, but we're more than simply the firing of synapses. We have supernatural interaction as well.

You continue to think just because God gave us what we have that life couldn't be created without him. That has never been evident anywhere. To state that would require an intelligence far beyond anything human beings have. We were granted the intelligence to understand very little of ourselves and nothing of anything else. I have no reason to think we are in any way special or unique to reality. To do so is to be outlandishly arrogant along the same lines as the pictures of Adam and Eve always being a white man and a white women, not to forget that Christ is always portrayed as a white man.

We are here. We know how, why is it so important to attack other ideas if it were not that our views need to be the only one's spoken. Are we that desperate to have mastery over the images that humanity banties around?

I disagree. The worldview produced by Darwinism is contrary to God's truths. That's a tragedy.

It's a tragedy if we stop thinking. the best ideas that have ever come into being were those who were created in controversy.

I agree, but Darwinism isn't science. It's faith-based pseudo-science producing a message of a Godless creation.

How do you know that? They might have stumbled upon the very mechanism that God used to create us. The Bible is very basic on this and there are no actual timeline or reference to man except that he created us in his image. For the life of me I can't see God as being humanoid.
The idea of image may be more essence than corporal.

What dose God need with two eyes, two ears and a mouth? He is everywhere and sees all things. I don't think he needs nostrils because I don't think he needs air to breath. Do you really think he needs a mouth? What use would be two arms or two legs. Would he need them to carry something or to propel him anywhere?

I think human beings have taken the word image as pattern of structure instead of something quite beyond us to understand.

One must differentiate between science and pseudo-science.

You go ahead and do that. I've already stated what evolution is to me.

Darwinism is the humanist religion wrapped in pseudo-science.

It is a theory that you despise because it doesn't validate you interpretation of reality.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

For my part I am not angry at creationist, I only feel sorry for them, I realise they can not help themselves and that's why I feel sorry for them.
Like Consol I am antitheist because I feel religions damage more people than they help, how much damage would you say Islam does or do you think it's a force for good?
Muslims pray five times a day unless it's a female on her period when she is not allowed to pray, does that sound man made to you? how much of Christianity is man made, all of it? none of it or just some of it.

I see that DanD's account has bitten the dust..... I'll write this in case he's still popping back here to read. Constructive criticism of religious dogma you feel is detrimental can actually be beneficial, but simply berating, haranguing or complaining is not only ineffective, it's counterproductive. The more defensive you make people feel about their beliefs - whether it's about religion our anti-vaccine or whatever - the more they are likely to band together with others who feel similarly and to avow never to alter their stance. They also are likely to view someone like you as pathetically wasting your time foaming at the mouth, and to even use you as an unfair representative of all their critics. You feel sorry for creationist, but behaving like you have just makes them and others (of various beliefs) feel sorry for you.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

I see that DanD's account has bitten the dust..... I'll write this in case he's still popping back here to read. Constructive criticism of religious dogma you feel is detrimental can actually be beneficial, but simply berating, haranguing or complaining is not only ineffective, it's counterproductive. The more defensive you make people feel about their beliefs - whether it's about religion our anti-vaccine or whatever - the more they are likely to band together with others who feel similarly and to avow never to alter their stance. They also are likely to view someone like you as pathetically wasting your time foaming at the mouth, and to even use you as an unfair representative of all their critics. You feel sorry for creationist, but behaving like you have just makes them and others (of various beliefs) feel sorry for you.

If he is this consul person then i pity him. Hate is a prison where time is irrelevant and misery is your only companion.

 

[justlookinla]

What do you think a theory is? It is not just a basless assumption determined on which side of the bed you fall out of. It is a well thought out evidence driven conclustion to how we came to being what we are today. It is not faith-based anything.

Darwinist evolution's process is certainly a baseless assumption. There's no evidence, based on the scientific method, for the process which produced all life we observe today.

​

Ok, I missed your meaning here and I apologize for that.

No problem.

That being said there is nothing to state that there is not anything more than a bag of chemicals involved in evolution. In order for you to know this you would have to be God.

Or believe what God said.

You continue to think just because God gave us what we have that life couldn't be created without him. That has never been evident anywhere. To state that would require an intelligence far beyond anything human beings have. We were granted the intelligence to understand very little of ourselves and nothing of anything else.

The issue with Darwinist evolution is that life was produced without God, based on biased, flawed and unsupportable guesses and suppositions.

I have no reason to think we are in any way special or unique to reality. To do so is to be outlandishly arrogant along the same lines as the pictures of Adam and Eve always being a white man and a white women, not to forget that Christ is always portrayed as a white man.

I can find no creature which exceeds humanity in creation.

We are here. We know how, why is it so important to attack other ideas if it were not that our views need to be the only one's spoken. Are we that desperate to have mastery over the images that humanity banties around?

Any views contrary to God's creation should be challenged.

It's a tragedy if we stop thinking. the best ideas that have ever come into being were those who were created in controversy.

I agree. We should never stop thinking or learning.

How do you know that?

The complete lack of evidence, based on the scientific method, for the how, the process they promote as science. It's not science, it's pseudo-science.

They might have stumbled upon the very mechanism that God used to create us. The Bible is very basic on this and there are no actual timeline or reference to man except that he created us in his image. For the life of me I can't see God as being humanoid.
The idea of image may be more essence than corporal.

Their process doesn't include God. It excludes, bans, forbids and dismisses any involvement of any impetus other than entirely naturalistic mechanisms.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

Darwinist evolution's process is certainly a baseless assumption. There's no evidence, based on the scientific method, for the process which produced all life we observe today.

There is much evidence to support it. just none that you are willing to except. That doesn't make it baseless. It just makes you unwwilling to except anything other than your own narretive, which has been the issue all along.

​

Or believe what God said.

Nice comeback but seeing that what is in print is so basic it's hard to make anything out of that except the basics.

The issue with Darwinist evolution is that life was produced without God, based on biased, flawed and unsupportable guesses and suppositions

you've said this before and repeating yourself doesn't make it correct. How does trying to determine the mechanism that produced life take God out of the picture? It says in the Bible that it took a day, but how do you measure a day if you are a entity that has existed forever and 24 hours is not even a blip in times.

I can find no creature which exceeds humanity in creation.

Go look up the book of Job to tell you how much God thinks about informing us of what he thinks is none of our bussiness. God told us as much as he thought nessecary and that was it.

Any views contrary to God's creation should be challenged.

You mean any veiws that your mortal brain has the capacity to think are contrary to what God says. your's is only an interpetation of what evolution states. Does all who take a look at that theory see it as against Gods word?



I agree. We should never stop thinking or learning.

The complete lack of evidence, based on the scientific method, for the how, the process they promote as science. It's not science, it's pseudo-science.

You are indeed fond of repeating yourself aren't you!

Their process doesn't include God. It excludes, bans, forbids and dismisses any involvement of any impetus other than entirely naturalistic mechanisms.

and you know that, how? From what I've noticed Christian's such as yourself have a very rigid opinion of certain things and not very open to anyone who doesn't support your determination of what anything is. They are so against a certain thing that they will only listen to those who demonize it. We have been and will continue to evolve from the time man first walked the Earth until we leave it. In a millennia we may not even look as we do now.

 

[justlookinla]

There is much evidence to support it. just none that you are willing to except. That doesn't make it baseless. It just makes you unwwilling to except anything other than your own narretive, which has been the issue all along.

No, there's no evidence for the HOW, the process. None. Zippo.

​

Nice comeback but seeing that what is in print is so basic it's hard to make anything out of that except the basics.

Doesn't make the Word untrue.

you've said this before and repeating yourself doesn't make it correct. How does trying to determine the mechanism that produced life take God out of the picture? It says in the Bible that it took a day, but how do you measure a day if you are a entity that has existed forever and 24 hours is not even a blip in times.

Either God was involved or He wasn't. Theists believe He was but the contrary view, Darwinist evolution, reject the view.

Go look up the book of Job to tell you how much God thinks about informing us of what he thinks is none of our bussiness. God told us as much as he thought nessecary and that was it.

It's our business when a worldview is being taught which rejects God in creation.

You mean any veiws that your mortal brain has the capacity to think are contrary to what God says. your's is only an interpetation of what evolution states. Does all who take a look at that theory see it as against Gods word?

First, "evolution" states a lot of things, dependent on the various view of evolution which is being promoted. If one teaches that God had noting to do with the creation of humanity, that's a very basic rejection of what the Word teaches over and over.

You are indeed fond of repeating yourself aren't you!

You're fond of making the same claims, therefore the responses will be the same.

and you know that, how?

I know that by the faith-based guesses and suppositions of Darwinist evolution.

From what I've noticed Christian's such as yourself have a very rigid opinion of certain things and not very open to anyone who doesn't support your determination of what anything is. They are so against a certain thing that they will only listen to those who demonize it. We have been and will continue to evolve from the time man first walked the Earth until we leave it. In a millennia we may not even look as we do now.

I'm very rigid in opposing the Godless view of the creation of humanity.

 

[AHH who-stole-my-name]

No, there's no evidence for the HOW, the process. None. Zippo.

As I've said no evidence that you will accept. You haven't even proven that evolution wasn't the very mechanizm God used to create life. All yiou do is repeat yourself.

​

Doesn't make the Word untrue.

basic truths leave a lot to be desired when science is involved.

Either God was involved or He wasn't. Theists believe He was but the contrary view, Darwinist evolution, reject the view.

No that's your assumptions because it leads to a conclusion you are comfortable with. You simply can't wrap your head around man being created by God in the form he is and you have no proof of that. You just have the basics and a truckload of arogance.

It's our business when a worldview is being taught which rejects God in creation.

No it's your bussiness because you simply ignore the parimeters Christ gave us, because it makes you feel important. This has nothing to do with Christ.

First, "evolution" states a lot of things, dependent on the various view of evolution which is being promoted. If one teaches that God had noting to do with the creation of humanity, that's a very basic rejection of what the Word teaches over and over.

It teaches natural selection and that has nothing to do with what created the spark, which was God. Your understanding of evolution probably evolved out of like minded people repeating themselves. I have never seen anything attributed to evolution that removes God from the picture, except some equally arogant people who they, themselves reject God, because it is just as inconceivable for them to embrace devinity as it is you to embrace evolution. You guys all have a spin on things and you just keep spinning.

You're fond of making the same claims, therefore the responses will be the same.

No, I've made observations and deductions that support my ideas and you've merely bypassed them as eligantly as posible. What about me speaking about the God created man in his own image? You didn't even try to respond to that, so your claims here are false.

I know that by the faith-based guesses and suppositions of Darwinist evolution.

Theories are not faith based

I'm very rigid in opposing the Godless view of the creation of humanity.

No your very rigid on promoting yourself as THE Christian that opposes something that will never effect God or his truth. Christ is left in the background as you grandstand over an issue that will never take away a thing from Christianity.

If Satan can't defeat God then how the heck can a thought defeat him.

 

[justlookinla]

As I've said no evidence that you will accept. You haven't even proven that evolution wasn't the very mechanizm God used to create life. All yiou do is repeat yourself.

And all you do is repeat the "no evidence you'll accept" mantra. Tell you what, offer the evidence, show that it's based on the scientific method and then you can claim you've offered evidence which I rejected.

basic truths leave a lot to be desired when science is involved.

Well, there's science and then there's the Darwinist pseudo-science.

No that's your assumptions because it leads to a conclusion you are comfortable with. You simply can't wrap your head around man being created by God in the form he is and you have no proof of that. You just have the basics and a truckload of arogance.

Simply show a Darwinist view of the process which produced humanity and which includes God. You'll not find it.

No it's your bussiness because you simply ignore the parimeters Christ gave us, because it makes you feel important. This has nothing to do with Christ.

What does it have to do with?

teaches natural selection and that has nothing to do with what created the spark, which was God.

Darwinism supposes the process which produced humanity from an alleged life form of long ago and forbids the inclusion of God.

Your understanding of evolution probably evolved out of like minded people repeating themselves.

Your belief that "evolution" is a monolithic term is an erroneous one.

I have never seen anything attributed to evolution that removes God from the picture, except some equally arogant people who they, themselves reject God, because it is just as inconceivable for them to embrace devinity as it is you to embrace evolution. You guys all have a spin on things and you just keep spinning.

Darwinist evolution (on of the several forms of evolution) completely removes God from the picture.

No, I've made observations and deductions that support my ideas and you've merely bypassed them as eligantly as posible. What about me speaking about the God created man in his own image? You didn't even try to respond to that, so your claims here are false.

Tell me about your observation of the process which created pine trees and humans from the same alleged life form of long ago.

Theories are not faith based

Beliefs without support of the scientific method are faith based.

No your very rigid on promoting yourself as THE Christian that opposes something that will never effect God or his truth. Christ is left in the background as you grandstand over an issue that will never take away a thing from Christianity.

If you think that Godless creationism (aka known as atheistic Darwinist creationism) as an explanation for how man came into existence is compatible with theistic creation, your comprehension is totally lacking.

If Satan can't defeat God then how the heck can a thought defeat him.

It's much much much more than a thought. It's spiritual warfare.