Where gravity and forces come from..!

[AV1611VET]

Columbus voyage has evidence.
Bible does not.

That's because you automatically jettison anything that serves as evidence.

Israel, reborn in 1948 according to prophecy = retconning.

Splitting of time between B.C. & A.D. = [whatever].

Basic doctrine = [insert ad hominem of choice].

Then you sit and wonder why we don't cater to your unbelief.

 

[Cabal]

That's because you automatically jettison anything that serves as evidence.

Israel, reborn in 1948 according to prophecy = retconning.

Splitting of time between B.C. & A.D. = [whatever].

Basic doctrine = [insert ad hominem of choice].

Then you sit and wonder why we don't cater to your unbelief.

If evidence is inconclusive, then it's inconclusive. C'est la vie, try harder.

 

[AV1611VET]

None of the fantastical events int he bible are ever proven.

You wouldn't be able to proven them, if God came back right now and repeated them.

If Elijah were here today, he'd probably tell you prophets of Baal to do this:

Get all your lab toys and meet me at the shores of the Red Sea. Bring your video-recording equipment, your Kirlian cameras, your ESP-sniffing canines, your DNA-seeking chemicals, and anything and everything else you can think of, and prepare to see a repeat of what happened in Moses' time. Get 450 of your Carl Sagans and your Stephen [what's-his-names] and meet me there. Let me know when your all set and ready to go.

I'm sure, after it's all over, you guys would go right back to denying everything.

In fact -- it would be worse.

Again, in my opinion.

 

[BrianOnEarth]

Except for one thing: we are made in the likeness and image of God.

Thus the universe would have to be tweaked for us to be able to live in this environment.

Should the variables change one iota, we would have to completely change in order to adapt -- so much so, that we would no longer have the 'image and likeness' of God.

Have some faith AV. God would adapt.

 

[Delphiki]

That's because you automatically jettison anything that serves as evidence.

No, because any time you're asked to provide evidence of the bible, all you show us is more bible.

Israel, reborn in 1948 according to prophecy = retconning.

Does it say, specifically, in the bible, that Israel will be "reborn" in 1948? I wasn't aware it actually tells you what year like an actual prophecy would.

Doesn't is also say that there will be peace there, which will be a sign of the end of the world? It's still not very peaceful there.

I predict it will fall apart again, how about that. As long as I don't say WHEN, does that make me a prophet?

Guess what, there will also be another earthquake in California. A hurricane will hit the Gulf Coast. Also, there will be another war in the Middle East.... Behold, I am a prophet, and I predict the future! *crazy eye*

Splitting of time between B.C. & A.D. = [whatever]

This isn't evidence at all. We started an official calendar (Julian) in the 6th century, and the BC/AD split at the time was the influence of the church.

Really, the only thing this is evidence of is the Julian calendar. It's carried over into the Gregorian calendar today.

So let me ask you something. Since the months are named after other gods: January is named after the God Janus (Ianuarius), March - Mars, May - the Godess Maia, and so on.. does that mean that proves that these gods really existed?

Today, the terms BC and AD have actually become obsolete. While the years are the same, we now use BCE and CE for "before common era" and "common era". Since you know... there are actually many different religions out there besides yours, including people without any religion.

Basic doctrine = [insert ad hominem of choice].

Then you sit and wonder why we don't cater to your unbelief.

Because, for some reason, you don't hold the bible at all to the same scrutiny that you hold any other book. Only it's older, has a lot more B.S. in it that can't be proven, and inspired a bunch of people to believe there is a supernatural force who doles out eternal consequences for our actions during a comparably infinitesimal life span.

It's completely and utterly absurd. In fact, it's no less absurd than Dianetics. After all, you can't prove that scientology is wrong, so they must be right, right?

 

[Cabal]

It's completely and utterly absurd. In fact, it's no less absurd than Dianetics.

Oh, I wouldn't go that far - at least Christianity contains some actual history in places

 

[Nathan Poe]

May I introduce you to science?

I think the real question is "Can you...?" You and science don't seem to be well acquainted enough for you to make introductions.

 

[Nathan Poe]

That's because you automatically jettison anything that serves as evidence.

Israel, reborn in 1948 according to prophecy = retconning.

So it's not very good evidence.

Splitting of time between B.C. & A.D. = [whatever].

How is that evidence of anything?

Basic doctrine = [insert ad hominem of choice].

Basic doctrine is not evidence, it's opinion.

Then you sit and wonder why we don't cater to your unbelief.

Actually, you wonder why we don't cater to your belief -- like it's our fault you build your houses on the sand.

 

[Split Rock]

This is an interesting point you make here.

Back when I studied Oceanography, I learned that some brilliant scientists got together to solve the problem of mankind going to great depths and getting nitrogen narcosis.

They had two subjects breathe pure oxygen for a period of two weeks, then go down to great depths and come back up.

The test was considered a success.

Later, both men died of leukemia.

I just love these little anecdotes you come up with. No references. No citations. Just, I remember a story about... Of course, they all end the same. Evil Godless scientists (who we are blessed with by God himself) do terrible things to A) Christians B) Innocent volunteers, who either wind up in an insane asylum or dead. Got any more?

 

[Split Rock]

If Elijah were here today, he'd probably tell you prophets of Baal to do this:
I'm sure, after it's all over, you guys would go right back to denying everything.

Which "prophets of Baal" were you referring to? I don't know of any here in this forum... do you, Mr. Pharisee?

 

[Cabal]

Which "prophets of Baal" were you referring to? I don't know of any here in this forum... do you, Mr. Pharisee?

Oh, you know. Not actively worshipping Baal means you actively worship Baal.

The funny thing is, if your average fundamentalist think you don't actively worship Christ, that's enough to No-True-Christianise you. But not actively kneel down to an altar of Baal, and hey look, you're a Baal-worshipper.

I think it would be quicker to list the things these guys ARE consistent on.

 

[sandwiches]

Oh, you know. Not actively worshipping Baal means you actively worship Baal.

The funny thing is, if your average fundamentalist think you don't actively worship Christ, that's enough to No-True-Christianise you. But not actively kneel down to an altar of Baal, and hey look, you're a Baal-worshipper.

I think it would be quicker to list the things these guys ARE consistent on.

It's somewhat consistent in as far as Jesus said "He who is not with me is against me..." So, unless you agree with the specific interpretation of the specific version of the Bible that the person believes in, then you're not "with" Jesus and thus, against him.

 

[Cabal]

It's somewhat consistent in as far as Jesus said "He who is not with me is against me..." So, unless you agree with the specific interpretation of the specific version of the Bible that the person believes in, then you're not "with" Jesus and thus, against him.

Sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean you worship something else - and it's especially hard to worship something when you're not even actively trying to.

 

[Split Rock]

Sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean you worship something else - and it's especially hard to worship something when you're not even actively trying to.

You're forgetting that we follow SATAN, even though we may not even know we are followers of SATAN. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that we worship Baal, even though we are not trying to worship Baal. You have to use Fundie Logic.

 

[pgp_protector]

You're forgetting that we follow SATAN, even though we may not even know we are followers of SATAN. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that we worship Baal, even though we are not trying to worship Baal. You have to use Fundie Logic.

Now I wonder what the odds are of someone quoting this OOC

 

[sandwiches]

Now I wonder what the odds are of someone quoting this OOC

Well considering that AV keeps quoting Split Rock every time someone asks him for evidence for his claims, I would say there's a pretty good chance.

 

[Split Rock]

Well considering that AV keeps quoting Split Rock every time someone asks him for evidence for his claims, I would say there's a pretty good chance.

Hmmm... what quote are you referring to??

 

[sandwiches]

Hmmm... what quote are you referring to??

I'll look for it but it's the one where you were trying to explain to AV that nothing is 'proven' in science. Now AV uses that any time anyone asks him for evidence.

 

[Cabal]

I'll look for it but it's the one where you were trying to explain to AV that nothing is 'proven' in science. Now AV uses that anyone asks him for evidence.

Usually in reference to something that is, um, not science...

 

[dad]

....Says the guy getting all his knowledge from a bronze age book full of ludicrous stories that can't be proven.

Actually, what we are mostly dealing with here is what knowledge science has, or not. For example, the not knowing what the basic forces of the universe are. For example not knowing anything beyond the present state. These sorts of things. This is the so called knowledge we can test. And test it is what I am doing here. Not ranting about various holy books, or other alternatives to not knowing. People may scurry off to where they wish to pick a belief to fill in the woefully inadequate belief based so called science models that are produced.

If you do not know what time is, how can you prove that time as we conceive of it exists among the stars? If you do not even know what gravity is, how can you say where it really comes from? Science is like a bunch of kids playing with toys, and not realizing who put the batteries in.