The problem of evil

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Then what's your explanation for creationists who persistently quote mine and misrepresent the facts?

With all due respect, that goes both ways. I have found more often than not that atheist tend to "quote mine" biblical scripture and misrepresent them in order to justify their arguments.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[amariselle]

Completely agree. But, as I've said, I'm seeing this from the theists and not the non-theists here on this site. I've seen Christians called out for plagiarism, then continue to do so. I've seen Christians agree that an argument of theirs was full of errors, yet continue to use it.

I guess my question is, do Christians think the ends justify the means? Is "lying for Jesus" ok? Because it happens often enough that it's a pretty common phrase amongst non-theists.

Everyone has lied at one point or another, we are ALL guilty of this. Has it happened on these forums?, sure, it likely has. However, I would say that lies (intentional or not) have been told on BOTH sides, not just by "Theists." Placing all of the blame on one group of people is hardly honest in and of itself.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

To be fair, I will revise my statement to say, "all creationists Christians."

Fair enough. I will say that IMO to believe that the universe was created by nothing, from nothing, for absolutely no reason requires some level of faith. I personally find that Deism is a more logical explanation than anything science has to offer. Not to argue about gaps, it just goes against many laws of nature.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Everyone has lied at one point or another, we are ALL guilty of this. Has it happened on these forums?, sure, it likely has. However, I would say that lies (intentional or not) have been told on BOTH sides, not just by "Theists." Placing all of the blame on one group of people is hardly honest in and of itself.

And so starts another debate started by a skeptic.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[amariselle]

And so starts another debate started by a skeptic.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Which skeptic? Are you referring to me?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Which skeptic? Are you referring to me?

No ma'am. I am referring to Todd. You gave him an answer that he didn't like so now he wants to debate it with you.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Archaeopteryx]

My explanation? Are you trying to get me to justify such things? And just because viewpoints other than your own are presented, does not mean someone is "misrepresenting the facts."

But showing that they have misrepresented the facts, repeatedly and wilfully, does mean that someone is "misrepresenting the facts." And creationists have been caught doing this on multiple occasions.

 

[amariselle]

But showing that they have misrepresented the facts, repeatedly and wilfully, does mean that someone is "misrepresenting the facts." And creationists have been caught doing this on multiple occasions.

Not only "creationists." Are you suggesting that non-creationists are just overall honest people, better than creationists? If so, I have to disagree with you. People are people, we have ALL lied.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Not only "creationists." Are you suggesting that non-creationists are just overall honest people, better than creationists? If so, I have to disagree with you. People are people, we have ALL lied.

Am I suggesting that scientists are, overall, more honest than professional creationists? Yes, I am suggesting that.

 

[amariselle]

Am I suggesting that scientists are, overall, more honest than professional creationists? Yes, I am suggesting that.

That is your opinion, and you are free to hold it. That does not mean scientists are actually more honest or professional. We are ALL people, I think that dishonesty and being unprofessional, occurs on both sides.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Am I suggesting that scientists are, overall, more honest than professional creationists? Yes, I am suggesting that.

Are you suggesting a "scientist" who intentionally misrepresented biblical scripture is overall, "more honest"? Are you suggesting that it is not dishonest to intentionally "quote mine" scripture to give a dishonest context? I admit that it is never acceptable to "lie for Jesus". But what about skeptics to "lie against Jesus"?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[HitchSlap]

Not only "creationists." Are you suggesting that non-creationists are just overall honest people, better than creationists? If so, I have to disagree with you. People are people, we have ALL lied.

It's my claim that this is an "offical" policy and tactic for creationists.

Are you familiar with the "wedge document?"

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That is your opinion, and you are free to hold it. That does not mean scientists are actually more honest or professional. We are ALL people, I think that dishonesty and being unprofessional, occurs on both sides.

This "both sides" argument is ridiculous. No, dishonesty is rampant on one side -- the creationist side. And the sooner you realise that, the sooner you'll distance yourself from them.

 

[amariselle]

It's my claim that this is an "offical" policy and tactic for creationists.

Are you familiar with the "wedge document?"

Actually no. But by all means, explain it to me. I have no use for "tactics" myself, I place my faith in Jesus, that is my choice, and others can choose for themselves.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Are you suggesting a "scientist" who intentionally misrepresented biblical scripture is overall, "more honest"? Are you suggesting that it is not dishonest to intentionally "quote mine" scripture to give a dishonest context? I admit that it is never acceptable to "lie for Jesus". But what about skeptics to "lie against Jesus"?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

When talking about evolution versus creation, it's creationists who are accused by other Christians of misrepresenting Biblical scripture.

 

[amariselle]

This "both sides" argument is ridiculous. No, dishonesty is rampant on one side -- the creationist side. And the sooner you realise that, the sooner you'll distance yourself from them.

Well, I'm certainly not going to take your word for it. Actually, I have very little trust for someone who doesn't want to admit that dishonestly is a human problem, regardless of beliefs, or "sides." People will (and have) said all kinds of things to get others to accept their position, and that is in no way confined to creationists.

 

[Davian]

No, but because God has created the world and place you in it and sent His spirit to speak through His creation and sent His servants to speak for Him....

Sounds like you

• Davian
• Nov 4, 2014

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

It's my claim that this is an "offical" policy and tactic for creationists.

Are you familiar with the "wedge document?"

It sounds like a political conspiracy to me. But I honestly have not read much about it.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Well, I'm certainly not going to take your word for it. Actually, I have very little trust for someone who doesn't want to admit that dishonestly is a human problem, regardless of beliefs, or "sides."

Where did I deny that dishonesty is a human problem? Can you point to the post?

People will (and have) said all kinds of things to get others to accept their position, and that is in no way confined to creationists.

I never implied that it was. I said:

Am I suggesting that scientists are, overall, more honest than professional creationists? Yes, I am suggesting that.

 

[amariselle]

When talking about evolution versus creation, it's creationists who are accused by other Christians of misrepresenting Biblical scripture.

Just as scientists have been accused by other scientists of misrepresenting scientific "facts". Again, dishonesty is a HUMAN issue, not confined to one particular set of opinions or beliefs.