Your favorite "Anti-evolutionist"

[Valkhorn]

No, plants in a merged state smell sweeter, like roses in heaven.

Why does Jesus look so white?

 

[dad]

Why does Jesus look so white?

It is an artist's conception.

 

[dad]

No, it clearly says turtle poo in the Bible.

No, that comes from inside you, nowhere in the bible.

Right below where it says that the constant speed of light was inconstant before the flood

It says that the stars were made for us, so we saw them, the light got here. There was also light before the sun was made. There is light in our city that is not the light of the sun as well. It also says this heavens will pass away, and new ones exist. Trying to impose present light as the be all end all of the bible is patently absurd.

 

[Chalnoth]

It says that the stars were made for us

And you believe this?

The 400 billion stars in our own galaxy were made just so that humans could look up at the sky and see them. The 100 billion galaxies, each containing a similar number of stars, were made just so that we could look up and see them. This is what you were saying?

That is about as much hubris as I think is possible.

On this subject, I really like what Carl Sagan has to say:

We succeeded in taking that picture [from deep space], and, if you look at it, you see a dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever lived, lived out their lives. The aggregate of all our joys and sufferings, thousands of confident religions, ideologies and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilizations, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every hopeful child, every mother and father, every inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lived there on a mote of dust, suspended in a sunbeam.

The earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and in triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of the dot on scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner of the dot. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light.


Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity -- in all this vastness -- there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us. It's been said that astronomy is a humbling, and I might add, a character-building experience. To my mind, there is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly and compassionately with one another and to preserve and cherish that pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.

For the source and the 'mote of dust' picture, see:
http://obs.nineplanets.org/psc/pbd.html

 

[dad]

And you believe this?

Of course, never saw any reason not to.

The 400 billion stars in our own galaxy were made just so that humans could look up at the sky and see them.

Hold on there. I said they were made for us. That includes to look at, but who knows the other uses we will have for the cosmos? Like populating a galaxy far far away some day perhaps, and cosmic tourism, and etc!

That is about as much hubris as I think is possible.

Your insignificant speck of dust in a cosmic vastness of equal importance hubris is only a worldview, like man being a mere beast. I do not share that view, we are the royal priesthood, children of the Living God, who will judge angels, and be His bride, and heirs to all the promises in the bible. We will be as gods.

On this subject, I really like what Carl Sagan has to say:


For the source and the 'mote of dust' picture, see:
http://obs.nineplanets.org/psc/pbd.html[/quote]
"Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light."
No Carl, it is not at all challenged! God made us important, and imagine all you like, if you can, being dead and all, we are not, it changes nothing! I must say I lose all respect for such a degrading opinion, however, Carl.

Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark.
We are not lonely, we are full of life, and were made in His very image and promised eternal life before this world began. God Himself is making this wonderful place His eternal home, nothing insignificant about it! Your inspired words could not be farther from the truth, Carl. So much for the paganistic Saganisms.

 

[Ryal Kane]

I'd like to know someone to show me where I've used the words "Evoltution is wrong"....or wrong wrong wrong.

Okay. Since you asked for it.

http://www.christianforums.com/t3892076-your-favorite-anti-evolutionist.html&page=3

..."Evoltution is wrong.... wrong wrong wrong....

Quote mining. What you get is what you give.

 

[Chalnoth]

Your insignificant speck of dust in a cosmic vastness of equal importance hubris is only a worldview, like man being a mere beast.

It's hubris to say that we aren't important in the grand scheme of things? Let's look at the definition of hubris, shall we?
http://www.webster.com/dictionary/hubris

exaggerated pride or self-confidence

Saying that we aren't important in the grand sheme of things is kind of the opposite of hubris.

Saying that we are the purpose for all of existence is the epotome of hubris.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

It says that the stars were made for us, so we saw them, the light got here. There was also light before the sun was made. There is light in our city that is not the light of the sun as well. It also says this heavens will pass away, and new ones exist. Trying to impose present light as the be all end all of the bible is patently absurd.

then why the heck are there so many stars you cant see with the naked eye?

Nope, 'm sticking with my turtle poo quantum gravity theory of rose olfactory stimulation.

If you can read the Bible and get anti-gravity, I can read it and get turtle poo.

 

[dad]

It's hubris to say that we aren't important in the grand scheme of things? Let's look at the definition of hubris, shall we?
http://www.webster.com/dictionary/hubris

Saying that we aren't important in the grand sheme of things is kind of the opposite of hubris.

Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hubris
Presuming arrogantly that God is wrong, and we are not important is what you are doing. If we humbly accept the royalty and greatness He gave us, it is not pride at all, or arrogance. Quite the opposit, in fact!

Try to get it together before you presume to correct others. I mean that.

 

[dad]

then why the heck are there so many stars you cant see with the naked eye?

Well, our eyes may be better in our new bodies (possibly originally, before the fall as well) for one thing. But, as I said, there are likely other purposes in the future for us to make use of our universe. Populating, and visiting them were a few I cited. I could get excited about that.

Nope, 'm sticking with my turtle poo ...

Too bad, that sounds worse than just PO, when you stick an extra o on it.

If you can read the Bible and get anti-gravity, I can read it and get turtle poo.

It is a moon sized gold city that lands on earth from heaven, not a giant turtle. There is a difference.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

It is a moon sized gold city that lands on earth from heaven, not a giant turtle. There is a difference.

unless the moon sized golden city and the giant turtle are alegories of the same thing?

I thought there was a scriptural injunction against believing in Golden Icons, anyway... that city of your sure sounds suspect... AND uncomfortable!

 

[Chalnoth]

Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hubris
Presuming arrogantly that God is wrong, and we are not important is what you are doing. If we humbly accept the royalty and greatness He gave us, it is not pride at all, or arrogance. Quite the opposit, in fact!

Try to get it together before you presume to correct others. I mean that.

Presuming that you alone know what God is saying is hubris, too.

 

[dad]

Presuming that you alone know what God is saying is hubris, too.

No need to presume if we can read the bible, or have it read to us. Then we know He made everything, and how big a part man has in creation. Nothing proud or arrogant about it at all.

 

[Chalnoth]

No need to presume if we can read the bible, or have it read to us. Then we know He made everything, and how big a part man has in creation. Nothing proud or arrogant about it at all.

Except now you're presuming that your interpretation is correct. And not only that, but you're presuming that your interpretation is correct in the face of overwhelming evidence against it. Doing that requires quite a lot of arrogance.

 

[dad]

unless the moon sized golden city and the giant turtle are alegories of the same thing?

Except the city is a staple of the bible and the turtle is a figment of your imagination. There is a difference!

I thought there was a scriptural injunction against believing in Golden Icons, anyway... that city of your sure sounds suspect... AND uncomfortable!

It is very comfortable, and it isn't mine. It belongs to the children of God of all ages, and God Himself. And we are very much to believe in it. Nothing wrong with the eternal building materials and most precious things God built it out of for us. All for us.

 

[dad]

Except now you're presuming that your interpretation is correct. And not only that, but you're presuming that your interpretation is correct in the face of overwhelming evidence against it. Doing that requires quite a lot of arrogance.

No, it requires exposing a lot of arrogance, and those that would stand in the way of a simple and clear understanding that in the beginning, God created the heavens and earth. And, in the week that followed, all life on earth, and there is no evidence whatsoever against that. Arrogant presumptions like a same past and future are not evidence. The future is as wonderful, and eternal as God says, and the past was just as He said as well, which means, it also had to be a different state.

 

[Chalnoth]

No, it requires exposing a lot of arrogance, and those that would stand in the way of a simple and clear understanding that in the beginning, God created the heavens and earth. And, in the week that followed, all life on earth, and there is no evidence whatsoever against that. Arrogant presumptions like a same past and future are not evidence. The future is as wonderful, and eternal as God says, and the past was just as He said as well, which means, it also had to be a different state.

In other words you're saying, "I'm right, and you're wrong, and no amount of evidence can ever convince me otherwise." Yup, hubris indeed.

 

[dad]

In other words you're saying, "I'm right, and you're wrong, and no amount of evidence can ever convince me otherwise." Yup, hubris indeed.

No amount of evidence exists, how could it convince me? That God created the heavens is not negotiable, it is an article of faith! If you have the arrogancy and pride to claim God was wrong just because you think you are right, how hubrispuberissmuberis indeed.

 

[Chalnoth]

No, I don't claim that God is wrong. I claim that God doesn't exist, based upon a total lack of evidence of the existence of any supernatural being. I would be very willing to accept evidence of the existence of any god. But since I haven't seen any convincing evidence, why should I believe?

 

[dad]

No, I don't claim that God is wrong. I claim that God doesn't exist, based upon a total lack of evidence of the existence of any supernatural being.

Physical evidence for a spiritual being is 'missing', I see. Wouldn't we look for spiritual evidence for spiritual things? After all, do we not look to physical evidence for physical things? Evidence, by the way you do not have that says the past or future is just physical. The plot thickens.

I would be very willing to accept evidence of the existence of any god. But since I haven't seen any convincing evidence, why should I believe?

Cheer up, I would be very willing to accept any that you have that He does not exist! Since you have none of that, your statement is, of course, strictly a statement of faith. And wheres that?