If you cant observe it directly, it can't be true...

[DevotiontoBible]

You don't see the self-contradiction in this statement?

This is not contradictory because truth is absolute not subjective.

 

[D McCloud]

The universe is not a thinking organism. Therefore, the universe cannot have rules, because it did not establish itself nor can it establish order. The universe is what it is. Only a Creator can establish anything. You don't do much in the way of English literature, philosophy, and reason do you?

This is one entire argument from ignorance.

Nothing suggest the universe could not have established itself. Therefore, why don't you prove the universe was established by a creator before making erroneous claims. I would suggest you start another thread if you wish attempt to do so though.

 

[cwolf20]

Strawman? LOl, and funny one.

*blink* who?

 

[cwolf20]

Perhaps you missed the point. One ape species does engage in all of these acts.


Fortunately, such an assumption is testable and has been found to be incorrect. If not for a particular species of ape, you might well be proven correct.

I said gentler, not cute cuddly stuffed animals that bop each other on the heads with tissue paper.

 

[DevotiontoBible]

Evolution is demonstrable, testable and observable. .

No it isn't!

 

[OdwinOddball]

There is no reason to doubt the Bible as historically accurate. Every turn of the archaeological shovel affirms the accuracy of persons, places, dates and events told in it's pages. However, archaeology has not given one pebble to support the accuracy of evolutions claims. This proves the Bible stories are facts and evolution's story is a myth.

I'd laugh if that wasn't such a sad staement. You truely are devoid of any ability to reason.

Every turn of the shovel uncovers ever more evidence which corroborates evolution, while to this day there remains zero, none, nada, zlich, evidence for the claims in the bible. Adam and eve? No evidence. Noah? No direct evidence other than a few tales of a merchant on the Tigris or Euphrates river with a different name. Moses? No evidence. Jesus Absolutely no evidence he existed whatsoever.

Really, its time to do some actual research. The people on this forum have done more to discredit Christianity than any amount of logic and Atheist rebuttal could ever hope to accomplish.

 

[AnEmpiricalAgnostic]

No it isn't!

 

[cwolf20]

Well frankly it doesn’t matter that much if you can observe it directly or not, as long as you can observe the evidence that it left behind.

You are correct of course, we have observed it directly.

Ghost

and the first thought that ran screaming through my mind was "cow dung?"

 

[LogicChristian]

No it isn't!

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

Sorry, wrong again.

 

[DJ_Ghost]

There is no reason to doubt the Bible as historically accurate. Every turn of the archaeological shovel affirms the accuracy of persons, places, dates and events told in it's pages. However, archaeology has not given one pebble to support the accuracy of evolutions claims. This proves the Bible stories are facts and evolution's story is a myth.

So then where is the garden of Eden? Where did Archaeologists find it and how did they test it?

Can I also point out they found Troy, we know where Athens is and Sparta was and we know Agamemnon, Helen and Paris existed. So by your own argument then Archaeology has proven the Iliad. The only problem there is the Iliad and the Bible are mutually exclusive if we assume the events they describe are to ba taken as literally true.

So how did Archaeology manage to prove two mutually exclusive stories?

I await your explanation with bated breath.

Ghost

 

[D McCloud]

There is no reason to doubt the Bible as historically accurate. Every turn of the archaeological shovel affirms the accuracy of persons, places, dates and events told in it's pages. However, archaeology has not given one pebble to support the accuracy of evolutions claims. This proves the Bible stories are facts and evolution's story is a myth.

First of all, evolution is a proven theory.

There has been no proof provided by science that confirms miracles the bible has claimed ever happened, and if you believe there has, I suggest you get your head checked. It's pretty easy to write a fictional piece of literature and include factual places.

 

[DJ_Ghost]

and the first thought that ran screaming through my mind

Oh come now, surely not the first, I’m sure you’ve had one before.

was "cow dung?"

Which bit do you think is rubbish then? The explanation of the scientific method or the idea that we have seen evolution?

Ghost

 

[Prince Lucianus]

So then where is the garden of Eden? Where did Archaeologists find it and how did they test it?

Good point.

Where are the enormous stables which Salomon apperantly had.
Where is Nain's city gate. Nain has been excavated thoroughly and it had no pallisade nor city walls. But Jesus (according to the bible) did walk though the city's gate.

Lucy

 

[Beastt]

There is no reason to doubt the Bible as historically accurate.

While the Bible does contain a degree of historical accuracy so do many books, openly presented as fiction. The point should be more the inaccuracies of the Bible such as the vast majority of Genesis.

Every turn of the archaeological shovel affirms the accuracy of persons, places, dates and events told in it's pages.

And every turn of the Bible's pages tell us of violations of the laws of physics. We're expected to believe that planets form covered in water, but without atmospheres. We're told that plants can grow without heat and light from the sun. We're subjected to assertions that the sun and moon reside within Earth's atmosphere and even that leprosy can be cured using bird blood, hyssop, scarlet and cedar wood. We're told that the Earth lies stationary in the universe and that the whole of the Earth can be seen from a sufficiently elevated viewpoint.

However, archaeology has not given one pebble to support the accuracy of evolutions claims. This proves the Bible stories are facts and evolution's story is a myth.

How does the systematic study of past human life and cultures based on discovery, recovery and examination evidence even apply to evolution?

Evolution is related to biology, not archaeology.

 

[Beastt]

I said gentler, not cute cuddly stuffed animals that bop each other on the heads with tissue paper.

Missed point number two.

Humans are apes. We're animals, mammals and apes. Your failure to recognize that fact has lead to a number of inaccurate suppositions on your part.

 

[Edx]

No it isn't!

IOW:

 

[DJ_Ghost]

Is any one else wondering why it is that Devotion insists that science requires direct observation of an event in one breath, whilst claiming archaeology proves the bible in another? Its almost as if some double standard was being applied isn’t it?

Ghost

 

[Beastt]

So then where is the garden of Eden? Where did Archaeologists find it and how did they test it?

Can I also point out they found Troy, we know where Athens is and Sparta was and we know Agamemnon, Helen and Paris existed. So by your own argument then Archaeology has proven the Iliad. The only problem there is the Iliad and the Bible are mutually exclusive if we assume the events they describe are to ba taken as literally true.

So how did Archaeology manage to prove two mutually exclusive stories?

I await your explanation with bated breath.

Ghost

All good points. Might I add that archaeological artifacts also date back to the time shortly after the Bible claims the entire Earth was flooded?

Archaeology, geology, hydrology meteorology and biology all show the Bibles claims about the flood to be fallacious.

 

[cwolf20]

Oh come now, surely not the first, I’m sure you’ve had one before.



Which bit do you think is rubbish then? The explanation of the scientific method or the idea that we have seen evolution?

Ghost

Making a point I thought. half the stuff we use no matter which side of the argument, dropped out of someone and onto a sheet of paper at some point in time. And someone somewhere in the world is calling any given argument or opinion a piece of crap.

 

[cwolf20]

Missed point number two.

Humans are apes. We're animals, mammals and apes. Your failure to recognize that fact has lead to a number of inaccurate suppositions on your part.

seeing as how we're intelligent.

We have learned how to domesticate our lesser relatives in order to slaughter them and eat them without chasing them down to eat them where they lay.

and have even learned how much easier it is to get rid of certain cravings simply by having them gathered in one location, such as sex for example.

well, that pretty much took care of the primary reasons why animals defend their territories.

so if we're more intelligent.... then why are we having wars, committing murder over anything and everything including religion, robbing banks, getting in fights, etc? You'd think all that would be a sign of less intelligence. Intelligence does imply that we have knowledge of right and wrong after all.

Of course I could be wrong. Give an ape our intelligence and maybe it'll start flinging bullets every which way.