Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's not so simple to "leave you alone" because the actions of religious people affect others.
Plenty of people think Bibles and korrans and Mafioso Books of the Dead do relate an accurate worldview, and that opinion crosses into social constructs, and those social constructs impact individuals’ freedoms. It leverages political decisions. It lends weight to laws that are developed and implemented.
Yet one cannot, according to you, apply the same strictures humans gain for knowledge against your holy book. Your particular interpretation, you argue, "gets a pass".
No, it doesn't. Your argument highlights the notion that "I've heard some who say that you have some sort of body in the afterlife" is not a firm requirement of all knowledge-based issues of human endeavor. Just because Christians claim the bible has a reputation of "holiness" doesn't qualify it as having some sort of special dispensation. It boils down to facts: Either these things happened, or they didn't. Either the message is a true one, or it's a false one.
Logic allows us to read and understand the contextual message of Bibles at the very start. Without logic and reason, you wouldn't understand the thing at all. I see no reason then, halfway through, to jettison the same rules of logic and reason as magically inapplicable, simply because the book has some sort of special reputation as being "holy".
Read it like fiction. Because that is what it is. How do we know this? Because from the outset, it tells a tale that is demonstrably false, as false as the Origin fables of Valhalla, or the sky lodge of the Iroquois. We never have any debates over the whole "It's turtles all the way down" creation myths, do we?It's always the “holy text” of the week mythology we wrestle over.
Which is completely without merit.
I concur with Hollie. Lonestar, you ask me to "leave you alone," yet in no way, do you leave me alone. Christians have been trying to inch their way into the political establishment since this country started
Omigosh!! You and Hollie are crazy!!!! This country was founded by Christians and was made up almost entirely of Christians in the beginning. It is the atheist fundie Darwinist who are trying to screw up the country, rid it of morals, and lead it down a path of death and destruction and abortion and STD's and homosexuality and AIDS and rascism and hate and obesity and sloth and greed. These are the tenets of Materialism and Darwinism.
nothing UR says makes any sense ...he never lets that simple fact get in his way .....when answering UR and YWC'S POST remember they have zero evidence.
Under Christian thought, humans have free will, which made it possible for them to choose sin, not God. Under evolutionary philosophy, there is no free will for humans.
That doesn't make any sense. I'm guessing the logic is that if life evolves then it doesn't have free will? You lost me.
bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!The school system is dumb-downed by thought of a designer,how is that ?
Clueless. The courts have protected the school system from science loathing fundie Christians attempting to force Christianity into public education.
Where will those judges be when the Almighty returns ? Satans pawns is what the judges are.
What would it take for you to believe?
Do you need a miracle? Do you need to see God with your own eyes?
As a Christian I believe the only way to The Father is through the Son. So both Chistianity and Islam cannot be true. IMO
It would take a miracle for me to believe, because at this point, I think the christian god is a logical impossibility, by its very own definition. It is claimed to be a perfect being, yet needs a relationship with us. That is a contradiction. A perfect being wouldn't need anything, and wouldn't be jealous. These are all very human attributes, and so, imperfect. I am therefore absolutely certain that the christian god does not exist. However, I can not be certain that some kind of deity does exist somewhere within, or even outside the universe, such as a deist god. There is so much about the christian god that seems so highly implausible to me at this point. To be honest, I want to believe because I struggle with mental health quite a bit and it causes me a lot of suffering, and an all loving god is a really nice thought, but that doesn't mean it exists. I refuse to let my emotional needs create something to alleviate personal suffering. In other words, I am not going to believe something because it feels good. I want it to be true. I care more about truth, than about what feels good to my limited mind.
Many of the concepts in your post are flawed fundamentalist views of who God is and stem from a lack of understanding of Scripture. Scripture is "God-breathed". It is inspired by God. That does not mean that God's hand entered the authors hand and wrote it out. The Bible is written by real men at real times in history in real cultures. It is written from a human standpoint. How else could man attempt to convey the traits of God but by human descriptions?
another steaming pile of bullshit .....you presented shit. the non questions you've foistedSpeak for yourself, I presented questions that add credibility to my beliefs but what can you offer to support your views ?efinition of FOIST
1a : to introduce or insert surreptitiously or without warrant b : to force another to accept especially by stealth or deceit
2: to pass off as genuine or worthy <foist costly and valueless products on the public
on us have no credibility
: Definition of CREDIBILITY
1: the quality or power of inspiring belief <an account lacking in credibility>
due to an enormous lack of quantifiable proof.
what has been presented to you as support for "our" view is evidence, that you reject because it runs counter to your willful ignorance.
I am a critical thinker that is what separates you and I. I am willing to test my beliefs against reality are you ?
then why did you responed?Correction: "Both creationism and ID PRESUME a designer..."Both creationism and ID infer a designer...
Sure they do. It's not CONCLUSIVE evidence, but there is indeed evidence that a designer was not needed.
First, "proof" is NOT the standard applied--verifiable evidence and/or valid logic is the standard applied.
Secondly, there is no evidence, that is validated with even BASIC intellectual rigor, that petitions for the existence of this designer that creationism and intelligent-design PRESUMES.
We don't! We apply the exact same standard for both! EXACTLY the same.
In contrast, no evidence (of an intellectually rigorous nature) OR "proof" was required for you to hold your belief in the existence of this "designer" you posit--yet you demand "proof" (i.e.; conclusive and irrefutable evidence) for refuting your assertion of this "designer"--as if it should be considered valid in the first place. You (as typical of creationists and intelligent-design promoters) hold "materialism" or "naturalism" or "Darwinism" to an ENTIRELY different standard than you hold your own PREASSUMPTION.
Why is that? Why do YOU require a higher standard from "naturalism" than you do for this "designer" of yours and creationism?
This is just presumptive nonsense. It is a point that has been refuted a thousand times.Anyone who looks at the evidence knows complexity is the result of intelligence.
For the same reasons you've refused to address where the "life" of your "creator" came from, I predict that you'll just as resolutely refuse to address where the intelligence that accounts for the "complexity" of your designer came from.
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"--Douglas Adams
Right,evolutionist infer natural processes are responsible for life but they lack evidence, The rest of your post is not worthy of a response.
non sequiturYou can't be serious
It's true. You and the other fundie are clearly lacking when it comes to available knowledge of science.
What causes a mutation hollie ? what causes the mutation to spread through the population ? Give me an example of mistakes upon mistakes making things better ? Hollie why are there mechanisms trying to correct these mistakes called mutations ?
How can codons be affected according to your theory ? what do I mean by codons being affected ?
Do deletion mutations aid in evolution ?
Insertion mutations how do they aid in evolution ?
you presented shit. the non questions you've foistedSpeak for yourself, I presented questions that add credibility to my beliefs but what can you offer to support your views ?
1a : to introduce or insert surreptitiously or without warrant b : to force another to accept especially by stealth or deceit
2: to pass off as genuine or worthy <foist costly and valueless products on the public
on us have no credibility
: Definition of CREDIBILITY
1: the quality or power of inspiring belief <an account lacking in credibility>
due to an enormous lack of quantifiable proof.
what has been presented to you as support for "our" view is evidence, that you reject because it runs counter to your willful ignorance.
I am a critical thinker that is what separates you and I. I am willing to test my beliefs against reality are you ?
It's not so simple to "leave you alone" because the actions of religious people affect others.
Plenty of people think Bibles and korrans and Mafioso Books of the Dead do relate an accurate worldview, and that opinion crosses into social constructs, and those social constructs impact individuals freedoms. It leverages political decisions. It lends weight to laws that are developed and implemented.
Yet one cannot, according to you, apply the same strictures humans gain for knowledge against your holy book. Your particular interpretation, you argue, "gets a pass".
No, it doesn't. Your argument highlights the notion that "I've heard some who say that you have some sort of body in the afterlife" is not a firm requirement of all knowledge-based issues of human endeavor. Just because Christians claim the bible has a reputation of "holiness" doesn't qualify it as having some sort of special dispensation. It boils down to facts: Either these things happened, or they didn't. Either the message is a true one, or it's a false one.
Logic allows us to read and understand the contextual message of Bibles at the very start. Without logic and reason, you wouldn't understand the thing at all. I see no reason then, halfway through, to jettison the same rules of logic and reason as magically inapplicable, simply because the book has some sort of special reputation as being "holy".
Read it like fiction. Because that is what it is. How do we know this? Because from the outset, it tells a tale that is demonstrably false, as false as the Origin fables of Valhalla, or the sky lodge of the Iroquois. We never have any debates over the whole "It's turtles all the way down" creation myths, do we?It's always the holy text of the week mythology we wrestle over.
Which is completely without merit.
I concur with Hollie. Lonestar, you ask me to "leave you alone," yet in no way, do you leave me alone. Christians have been trying to inch their way into the political establishment since this country started
Omigosh!! You and Hollie are crazy!!!! This country was founded by Christians and was made up almost entirely of Christians in the beginning. It is the atheist fundie Darwinist who are trying to screw up the country, rid it of morals, and lead it down a path of death and destruction and abortion and STD's and homosexuality and AIDS and rascism and hate and obesity and sloth and greed. These are the tenets of Materialism and Darwinism.
bahahahahahahahahaha!Great info Hollie! What is your educational background?
It is interesting, don't you think? All the lies and deceit furthered by fundies in connection with some alleged "design" they want introduced into the school system is nothing more than frantic attempts to force christianity.in the school syllabus.
Jerry Falwell and the Christian Taliban.
BTW, my little personal stalker, I'll require you to continue with the gargantuan fonts.
I totally agree, but where did you go to college? What type of science background do you have?
You know what Hollie? Your hatred only eats away at YOUR insides, and doesn't affect those you hate. You live under the cloud of hurt and unforgiveness. Forgive your parents and those who have wronged you and you will be free. It is your forgiveness of others that will release your hatred, and unload that huge burden of bitterness you have been carrying since your childhood. Your hate only hurts you. Christ said, "This is my commandment. That ye love one another."
After about 30 minutes of going through all my created threads, I found it...
http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...ing-and-or-purpose-of-life-to-an-atheist.html
Care to weigh-in on my old thread there buddy?
Biology 101 and high school science would be a good start for you.
Plenty of evidence here on earth to prove that this planet has been here for millions of years.
NO ONE is saying that PEOPLE have been here for millions of years.
There is plenty evidence here on this planet and on other planets pointing to a young universe based on solid science, Now what ?
a stopped clock is right twice a day...or or the 50% rule you pick..Fundie Christians don't react well to challenges to their bible tales.You are wasting your time with Hollie the Troll. She has settled for the belief of ignorance.
You haven't reacted well yourself.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how can it be that statements in the Bible that are scientifically accurate given the fact it was written over two thousand years ago.
And what in the Bible do you say is a falsehood?
fractally wrong 101 up, 2 downAh, yes. With your first sentence you have employed the "you can't disprove it", tactic.My terms need no defining.
What evidence do you have that there was no great flood or no one ever rose from the dead and the sea never parted?
Marine Team Finds Surprising Evidence Supporting A Great Biblical Flood
As researchers prove the Red Sea really could have parted... How science backs the Bible's best stories
Once again you're putting words in my mouth.
I never made the claim that the Bible was not contradicted by science. I simply stated that statements in the Bible are consistent with science.
Why do you insist on distorting what I've said?
God could have done the things you mentioned but it would have fell on deaf ears because man was not equipped at the time to understand scientific principles.
God gave us the ability to seek out and discover the information ourselves at our pace.
It really is a standard ploy for those whose arguments are intellectually bankrupt and bereft support or substantiation.
So yes, I have proof that there was no great flood, that no one ever rose from the dead and the sea never parted.
Prove I don't.
To add to that you can't prove naturlistic processes that converted nonliving matter to living organisms.
the bible has no scientific credibility simply because it's based on a false unprovable premise and there is no quantifiable evidence to support the claims of supernatural causation.What challenge have you offered ,you run from my questions, you copy and paste things that have nothing to do with my ????. You are bold writing some of the things you write knowing people are reading this thread.
YWC, if you want to use the bible as a credible source, it has to be demonstrated as being a credible source first. You, nor anyone else, can do that, because it simply is not, just like the Koran is not a credible source, or the Bhagavad Gita. It is special pleading to simply ask people to accept the bible as authority without justification. There is plenty reason to think the bible is not credible. It is an ancient book. We know none of the authors, have no signatures, and they are all translations or translations of copies of translations by authors with an agenda. You can not demonstrate empirically that any of it is the word of god, and therefore, that any of it, is actually true, hence why you must take it on faith. So, stop using the bible in this thread as if it means anything here in terms of proving you're point, because it doesn't. You can't use the bible to prove the bible.
You can't demonstrate that all of those different authors, are who they say they are. The historicity of the bible does not even bear out with what we know to be true about history, which is another indictment against its credibility.
One way to find out if the Bible is credible is to compare it with other sources of history. There are, in fact, many examples of other nations chronicling the wars and deeds of the Israelites. Though they are too numerous to spell out, one example where biblical history is corroborated with other sources is the story of Hezekiah.
Hezekiah, a brave king of Judah, faced a devastating onslaught from Assyria. Scripture records that Hezekiah built a massive wall around Jerusalem to fortify the city. He also diverted the Gihon spring so that a water supply could be found within the wall (2 Kings 20:20, 2 Chronicles 32:30). God promised that Jerusalem would not fall to the Assyrians; and though the majority of Judah did surrender to Sennacherib, Jerusalem did not.
Second Chronicles 32:9, 21 reports, "Sennacherib king of Assyria sent his servants to Jerusalem while he was besieging Lachish with all his forces with him, against Hezekiah king of Judah . . . The Lord sent an angel who destroyed every mighty warrior, commander and officer in the camp of the king of Assyria. So [Sennacherib] returned in shame to his own land."
The physical existence of the wall and the water tunnel can be confirmed in Jerusalem. You can still see both of the striking structures today. However, it seems that if this account were true, Assyrian history would confirm the event. And, in fact, it does. On an artifact called the Lachish Frieze, reliefs depict Sennacheribs attempts to take Jerusalem.
This is just one example; however, celebrated archaeologist William F. Albright affirms, "Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of the Bible as a source of history."
There are also many instances of corroboration in the New Testament. One striking confirmation is of the darkness and earthquake that occurred while Christ was dying on the cross (Matthew 27:45-52). In his book Pontius Pilate, Paul Maier writes, "Phlegon, a Greek author . . . reported that in the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad (i.e., 33 A.D.) there was the greatest eclipse of the sun and that it became night in the sixth hour of the day [i.e., noon] so that stars even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia."
One of the leading concerns in viewing the Bible as a reliable source is in its transmission. How can we be sure that the sources we rely upon are authentic? This is answered by determining the quality of the manuscripts.
To analyze this, a comparison is in order. One of historys treasured possessions is Caesars recounting of the Gallic Wars, which he penned during the first century. Without his account, we would know barely anything of these important conflicts.
However, the actual papyri Caesar recorded his history on are no longer in existence. The earliest copies one might examine are from A.D. 900950. In fact, there are only 10 complete copies and fragments available for inspection. Even so, these documents are taught as historical fact.
The Bible, on the other hand, has many manuscripts to rely upon. Burnett H. Streeter has assured, "The degree of security that . . . the text has been handed down to us in a reliable form is prima facie, very high."
There are in existence more than 14,000 Old Testament manuscriptssome dating back as far as 400 B.C.! As for the New Testament, there are over 5,300 manuscripts in existence, with nearly 800 of them written before 1000 A.D.!
F. F. Bruce sums up the case by saying, "Scholars are satisfied that they possess substantially the true text of the principal Greek and Roman writers whose works have come down to us, of Sophocles, of Thucydides, of Cicero, of Virgil; yet our knowledge of their writings depends on a mere handful of manuscripts, whereas the manuscripts of the New Testament are counted by hundreds, and even thousands."
IMA is right if you take out the bullshit that YWC injected..Either we believe the scriptures or we do not.
Science has shown that the/a world can't be made in 6 days. THE FIRST FUCKING PAGE!!!!!!
Yeah if you leave out the part of a being that is beyond our comprehension. Genesis say's ten times kinds bring forth adfter their own kind and after billions of observations kinds do bring forth after their own kind.
when it seeks to impose it's pov on fredom of choice and hold itself higher then the law of the nation.It's not so simple to "leave you alone" because the actions of religious people affect others.
Plenty of people think Bibles and korrans and Mafioso Books of the Dead do relate an accurate worldview, and that opinion crosses into social constructs, and those social constructs impact individuals freedoms. It leverages political decisions. It lends weight to laws that are developed and implemented.
Yet one cannot, according to you, apply the same strictures humans gain for knowledge against your holy book. Your particular interpretation, you argue, "gets a pass".
No, it doesn't. Your argument highlights the notion that "I've heard some who say that you have some sort of body in the afterlife" is not a firm requirement of all knowledge-based issues of human endeavor. Just because Christians claim the bible has a reputation of "holiness" doesn't qualify it as having some sort of special dispensation. It boils down to facts: Either these things happened, or they didn't. Either the message is a true one, or it's a false one.
Logic allows us to read and understand the contextual message of Bibles at the very start. Without logic and reason, you wouldn't understand the thing at all. I see no reason then, halfway through, to jettison the same rules of logic and reason as magically inapplicable, simply because the book has some sort of special reputation as being "holy".
Read it like fiction. Because that is what it is. How do we know this? Because from the outset, it tells a tale that is demonstrably false, as false as the Origin fables of Valhalla, or the sky lodge of the Iroquois. We never have any debates over the whole "It's turtles all the way down" creation myths, do we?It's always the holy text of the week mythology we wrestle over.
Which is completely without merit.
I concur with Hollie. Lonestar, you ask me to "leave you alone," yet in no way, do you leave me alone. Christians have been trying to inch their way into the political establishment since this country started, and in doing so, attempt to affect my life. It is again, asking for special treatment of me to not bother you, when your beliefs are responsible for attempts at undermining the constitution, and my rights.
Well Hollie likes to put words in peoples mouths. I never once asked to be left alone.
As a Christian we were told By Jesus Christ. "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." (Matthew 28:19-20 NIV)
Religion has always been a part of this nation. And always will be.
How has religion undermined the Constitution?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...so again how does religion undermine the Constitution?
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb6Z6NVmLt8"]Evolution Predicts Ring Species[/ame]Of course it is an appeal to popular opinion to cite Project Steve, but it still illustrates a point. It doesn't necessarily make the claims of evolution true, and that wasn't why I posted it, but it does mean that thousands upon thousands of experts who know far more than you or I about the subject at hand, do think that evolution is true. What's more, is they are actively using this information in their field to improve and understand our world, demonstrated by the technology we see around us in medical biology (ie, vaccines). This is a concrete example of the fruits of understanding evolution, as it lies at the center of understanding biology. The same can not be said for IDers, as their model provides no predictive power. Name one example of predictive power that ID provides.
Evolution does not provide predictive power ...
YWC, if you want to use the bible as a credible source, it has to be demonstrated as being a credible source first. You, nor anyone else, can do that, because it simply is not, just like the Koran is not a credible source, or the Bhagavad Gita. It is special pleading to simply ask people to accept the bible as authority without justification. There is plenty reason to think the bible is not credible. It is an ancient book. We know none of the authors, have no signatures, and they are all translations or translations of copies of translations by authors with an agenda. You can not demonstrate empirically that any of it is the word of god, and therefore, that any of it, is actually true, hence why you must take it on faith. So, stop using the bible in this thread as if it means anything here in terms of proving you're point, because it doesn't. You can't use the bible to prove the bible.
You can't demonstrate that all of those different authors, are who they say they are. The historicity of the bible does not even bear out with what we know to be true about history, which is another indictment against its credibility. For instance, Matt, Mark, Luke and John, were not the authors of their respective gospels. We have no signatures on those documents. Those names were assigned to those gospels later. Who's to say the same wasn't done to books in the OT? Until you can provide justification for someone else to believe the bible is credible, citing passages from it is really pointless.
This is preposterous!! No one questions the authorship or credibility of the Illiad and the Odyssey.
Nothing in the Iliad was meant to be taken as gospel, or to be used as a religion to guide people's lives. It is simple a story like any other. It is uncertain whether or not it recounts true events, as the trojan war itself can not be said to have taken place with any certainty. That is a major difference between that and the bible, which attempts to convince people that they will go to hell if they do not believe, because an all-powerful, and all-loving god will send them there.
The iliad and the odyssey do not make claims about a god ruling over our lives, and does not attempt to tell people how to live, because they are not books that attempt to establish any religion. They may mention gods, but not to proselytize. It was merely part of Homer's belief system. The point of the story was not to attempt to convince others to believe in god. It was to relate a story.
Further, the consequence of the iliad being wrong, is of no consequence at all, as far as our lives today go. It doesn't make any extraordinatry claims, so it wouldn't be a big deal.
