Let's clear this up once and for all

[AV1611VET]

It makes no assumptions either for or against God's existence.

Then why do you "scientists" here call the things of God "myths", and use words like "poof" and "magic"?

(I have my own idea why, but I want to hear it from someone with an education. That's why I'm asking you.)

 

[AV1611VET]

"NO! You're wrong, there is no evidence of God's existence."

You mean none in your computers --- right?

1000 years ago, if they made the same claim about Element 100, would they be right?

Yes they would, in my opinion.

The evidence would be there, just not recognized as yet.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ever considered that direct empirical proof of God would destroy any notion of faith?

That's right --- and God intends for us to walk by faith --- not sight.

 

[Hespera]

That's right --- and God intends for us to walk by faith --- not sight.

So if you sees Faith standing there, you are supposed to walk by.

That aintt very friendly.

 

[AV1611VET]

So if you sees Faith standing there, you are supposed to walk by.

That aintt very friendly.

That's real cute --- and that's why you guys don't understand anything, either.

 

[Hespera]

Then why do you "scientists" here call the things of God "myths", and use words like "poof" and "magic"?

(I have my own idea why, but I want to hear it from someone with an education. That's why I'm asking you.)

Coz there are an awful lot of different religions, all of which are myths.

"Poof" I got from theocreos, they use it to try to discredit evolution.

Magic seemed to me the same as miracle, two slightly different ways of describing something that does not exist. So its basically a meaningless distinction.

Another reason to use it is probably that it irritates some people. No doubt
people on the theocreo side never act out of such base motives, but, you know how them godless daughters of atheistic communism are.

 

[Hespera]

That's real cute --- and that's why you guys don't understand anything, either.

Does this mean that you will cease to post things that are "real cute"?
They do get tiresome.

The problem with understanding "anything' is usually with those who are proud to be ignorant, isnt it? Or do I get cause and effect mixed up like they do when they pretend to make prophesies?

 

[Cabal]

That's right --- and God intends for us to walk by faith --- not sight.

That doesn't mean, however, that we shouldn't consider the implications of what the evidence does actually say empirically.

 

[Alunyel]

Then why do you "scientists" here call the things of God "myths", and use words like "poof" and "magic"?

(I have my own idea why, but I want to hear it from someone with an education. That's why I'm asking you.)

Because they are, perhaps?

I quoted the Oxford dictionary as to the definition of "myth.".

Re-read it and tell me why "things of God" doesn't fit that definition.

 

[Philothei]

Mod hat on

Please stick with the issue at hand. This is not GA and the isssue is evolution not God. Stick with the OP please or this thread will be closed.

Mod hat off​

 

[AV1611VET]

Mod hat on

Please stick with the issue at hand. This is not GA and the isssue is evolution not God. Stick with the OP please or this thread will be closed.

Mod hat off​

--- okay, sorry.

 

[Naraoia]

You mean none in your computers --- right?

1000 years ago, if they made the same claim about Element 100, would they be right?

Yes they would, in my opinion.

Of course.

The evidence would be there, just not recognized as yet.

Yes, and until the evidence is recognised, everyone has every right to doubt the claim. I don't believe this analogy serves your cause

 

[AV1611VET]

Of course.

Yes, and until the evidence is recognised, everyone has every right to doubt the claim. I don't believe this analogy serves your cause

Yes, it does.

Element 100 wouldn't even be a matter of consideration --- on paper or otherwise.

God, on the other hand, is on the lips of almost every single person on earth --- and Jesus Christ, in general, is in the minds of almost all of those.

 

[Cabal]

You mean none in your computers --- right?

1000 years ago, if they made the same claim about Element 100, would they be right?

Yes they would, in my opinion.

The evidence would be there, just not recognized as yet.

That stance rather backs up TE.

Evolution "wouldn't even be a matter of consideration --- on paper or otherwise" back when Genesis 1 was written down.

Cue the backpedalling.

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolution "wouldn't even be a matter of consideration --- on paper or otherwise" back when Genesis 1 was written down.

Of course it wouldn't.

Evolution was never really an alternative to Genesis 1 until Darwin had The Preservation of Favoured Races published 24 Nov 1859.

 

[Cabal]

Of course it wouldn't.

Evolution was never really an alternative to Genesis 1 until Darwin had The Preservation of Favoured Races published 24 Nov 1859.

What I meant was, just like noone would have been able to conceptualise what "element 100" was 1000 years ago (definitely not 6000 years ago), neither would they be able to the same with the concepts of evolution, cosmology etc.

Hence a creation analogy.

 

[AV1611VET]

What I meant was, just like noone would have been able to conceptualise what "element 100" was 1000 years ago (definitely not 6000 years ago), neither would they be able to the same with the concepts of evolution, cosmology etc.

Hence a creation analogy.

Element 100 is real though, and as I pointed out (or should have), anyone claiming in 1009 that Element 100 didn't exist would have been wrong.

ETA: Way to go, me.

I just looked it up, and Element 100 is artifically produced --- go figure.

But I'm sure you see my point.

 

[Hespera]

Of course it wouldn't.

Evolution was never really an alternative to Genesis 1 until Darwin had The Preservation of Favoured Species published 24 Nov 1859.

People came along with "alternate ideas" long long after evolution had made them what they were.

Its kind of disgusting, really, that all the time effort luck and skill that went into the countless generations of predecessors surviving and developing, all of that is just swept away by ignorant forgetful descendants who say, no they never were, we are all made, Poof! in a flash, not long ago. We have no ancestors like you. Be gone!

I wish there could be an afterlife just so people could meet a greeting line of their ancestors who they renounced in favor of... what. Nothing.

 

[Cabal]

Element 100 is real though, and as I pointed out (or should have), anyone claiming in 1009 that Element 100 didn't exist would have been wrong.

ETA: Way to go, me.

I just looked it up, and Element 100 is artifically produced --- go figure.

But I'm sure you see my point.

Nice find - btw, we can induce artificial selection in creatures too

Leaving aside the fact that God=not empirical, it still works well for TE.

"Evolution is real though, and anyone claiming in 1009 that evolution didn't exist would have been wrong."

 

[AV1611VET]

People came along with "alternate ideas" long long after evolution had made them what they were.

That is correct.

Evolution (a Greek invention) was discussed long before Darwin was ever born.

The Bible, in my opinion, also discusses it, referring to it in its infancy in three basic terms:

1. An invention.
2. A philosophy.
3. Endless genealogies.