Creationists

[UltimateReality]

God, through the Bible, frames what is meant by "day" in terms of what would become the standard for a day for Adam (...and the evening and the morning was the first.. second... third... day). God created for 12 hours and then rested 12 hours.

YouTube

Ted Nugent - Uncle Ted on Gun Control

The point is that where the Federal government defines what everyone will do, rights are taken away from its citizens everywhere to decide how things will be done. And if the Federal Government is confused and agnostic and a spend thrift, the country becomes agnostic and confused and poor. Where the Federal Government mandates education, the students are limited to what the government believes is a resonable education and a proper mode of study. Everything is tied together with how the Government deals with God and Creationism. It does not stop there. The government will eventually want to decide what people believe --- Gun ownership is bad, Abortion is a good example of population control, Homosexual marriage is equal with heterosexual marriage, all opinion is equally valid unless it not accepted by the government....

Taken one step further... If our rights come from the Creator, and you eliminate the Creator, then our rights can only come from the State. Then we are at the mercy of the State because they can just as easily take away any rights that they can give. My inalienable rights come from God. No government will ever have power over me, not even unto death. I will remain free, regardless of the un-Constitutional laws the left wing liberal nutjobs try to impose.

 

[UltimateReality]

Ted Nugent - Uncle Ted on Gun Control

Uncle Ted don't care for liberal agendas.

He certainly does not pull any punches. He seems openly honest and at least more reasonable, than someone who imagins that if govenrmant makes blank laws that evil people will not find a way to do evil things. It is the honest person who gets hurt. The honest person pays the taxes too support the results of the evil person's evil habits.

It makes me sick knowing I am working to pay for someone like Hawly to sit around on her fat ass claiming her fake disability in order to use her time to torment others instead of working. Gotta love the liberal agenda.

 

[UltimateReality]

Creationist have as many interpretations of hell as they do verses in their bibles.

It's whatever you want it to be for conveniences' sake.

Hell means different things in the Bible. One must read the particular verses/chapter in context. Yes, I know that sometimes hell does mean the grave, sometimes a garbage dump and sometimes eternal separation from God. Hell is the timeless place people go who never wanted anything to do with God. They get their heart's desire. The issue is that everyone will see the glory of God one day and have a glimpse of heaven. But not all will be allowed to remain. That is hell.

... The interpretation is also a function of the interpreter which means that "hell" can be whatever one wishes it to be.

How convenient.

WRONG!! Interpretation should be done according the principles of Hermeneutics. If these "rules" are followed, 100 people would come up with the same interpretation.

 

[Hollie]

Faith always comes first and then comes the works. The works are the sign of one's faith and are the result of the working of the Holy Spirit in the life of the saved individual. The works do not achieve salvation. The Law was God's illustration to man of perfection and man's inability to work his way to God. Only God Himself could keep the Law --- the Christ, the only begotten Son of God. Even the faith comes from God and not from within ourselves. God comes to the door of our inner being and knocks. We either accept or reject. When we accept our soul becomes moldable. If we reject God, one's soul becomes harder and harder. This is what happened to Pharoah and King Saul as examples...

I have not faired well with my actions sometimes in this thread.

Don't fall prey to evil people like Hawly. Here tactic is to make you so frustrated with her stupidity and repetitive dribble that you act unbecomingly.

Actually, my creepy stalker gets frustrated beyond words when his nonsensical arguments are trashed as pointless and baseless.

 

[Hollie]

Hell means different things in the Bible. One must read the particular verses/chapter in context. Yes, I know that sometimes hell does mean the grave, sometimes a garbage dump and sometimes eternal separation from God. Hell is the timeless place people go who never wanted anything to do with God. They get their heart's desire. The issue is that everyone will see the glory of God one day and have a glimpse of heaven. But not all will be allowed to remain. That is hell.

... The interpretation is also a function of the interpreter which means that "hell" can be whatever one wishes it to be.

How convenient.

WRONG!! Interpretation should be done according the principles of Hermeneutics. If these "rules" are followed, 100 people would come up with the same interpretation.

That's typically foolish. Christianity has splintered into so many competing sects and subdivisions for what reasons?

It's amazing, the (retarded) mental gymnastics used by creationist to re-write the bibles which, after millennia, still are being rewritten.

 

[Hollie]

YouTube

Ted Nugent - Uncle Ted on Gun Control

The point is that where the Federal government defines what everyone will do, rights are taken away from its citizens everywhere to decide how things will be done. And if the Federal Government is confused and agnostic and a spend thrift, the country becomes agnostic and confused and poor. Where the Federal Government mandates education, the students are limited to what the government believes is a resonable education and a proper mode of study. Everything is tied together with how the Government deals with God and Creationism. It does not stop there. The government will eventually want to decide what people believe --- Gun ownership is bad, Abortion is a good example of population control, Homosexual marriage is equal with heterosexual marriage, all opinion is equally valid unless it not accepted by the government....

Taken one step further... If our rights come from the Creator, and you eliminate the Creator, then our rights can only come from the State. Then we are at the mercy of the State because they can just as easily take away any rights that they can give. My inalienable rights come from God. No government will ever have power over me, not even unto death. I will remain free, regardless of the un-Constitutional laws the left wing liberal nutjobs try to impose.

The creator Hindu gawds will work things out.

The true Hindu gawds should supplant the false xtian gawds in public schools.

Don't sweat it fundie-man, you can still wear your Gott mit Uns belt buckles.

 

[daws101]

Here is exactly what your secularized education has led to:
10 years later, the real story behind Columbine - USATODAY.com

WAY TO MAKE HOLLIE'S POINT CRYSTAL CLEAR! asshole!

Hollie's point was that bringing Creationism into the classroom would cause fear, confusion, and bring about superstition. Well, the TRUTH is that the public school system in these United States has had 50 years of no Christian understanding expressed and little such influence (due to governmental legal control). The result has been fear, confusion, and the growth of superstious hedonism. The gothic movement, mass shootings, and a breakdown of stable family values. Instead of coming out of the cave, as evolutionists promote, society seems to be headed towards a new dark age. Students are faced with making poor judgment calls with regard to hygene, sex, drugs, behavior patterns. Abortion rates have gone up. Unwed motherhood has increased. Boys thinks they are girls and girls think they are boys. Both think that skin is a canvas for billboard displays and punching holes in the likes of which have not been seen even among jungle tribes.
The truth is that while American Judao/Christian values had an open expression in the public school classroom, things were not perfect; however, things were far more stable. There was far less confusion between what was right and wrong/logical and illogical. Agnostic/hedonistic opinion/values faced opposition and didn't have an unlimited influence.
Note: I have not stooped to childish name calling and feel that I have presented a fair apraisal from a position of having witnessed the time period in question. I lived the educational changes from 50's/early 60's education to the downward spiral after the fall of 1963. The change was drastic and immediate. I can see that only the reintroduction of God in some degree of representation is what will reestablish progressive education, and help end the increasing cicle of helpless negativity so pervasive throughout society today.

hummm... you would bring back repression of minorities, LGBT persons, CENSORSHIP Back alley abortions just to name a few.
other Christian hijinks through history include the crusades the
in·qui·si·tion
[in-kwuh-zish-uhn, ing-] Show IPA

noun
1.
an official investigation, especially one of a political or religious nature, characterized by lack of regard for individual rights, prejudice on the part of the examiners, and recklessly cruel punishments.
what you've presented is a fine example of bigotry, theism, false declarations, hubris ethnocentrism and plain old ignorance.


now I will refute your steaming pile of bullshit!
The truth about God in public schools
By Charles C. Haynes

Attacks on the "Godless public schools" have been at the top of the culture-war hit list for more than 40 years. Hardly a day goes by without some politician or televangelist reminding Americans of how the Supreme Court kicked God out of the schools in the 1960s — and how the nation has been sliding down a slippery slope of moral and spiritual decline ever since.

The banishment of the Deity from the classroom is a compelling story that plays well in a nation where millions of citizens take their faith seriously. There's only one problem:

It isn't true.

Yes, 20 years ago many public schools did come close to being religion-free zones. In the wake of the controversial court decisions banning state-sponsored religious practices, some school officials overreacted by trying to keep all religion out. Textbooks largely ignored religion, and teachers were hesitant to teach about it. Administrators mistakenly confused student speech with government speech and told kids to leave their religion at the schoolhouse door.

But that was 20 years ago. Today, most state standards and textbooks include considerable mention of religion; student religious clubs meet on hundreds, if not thousands, of high school campuses; the sight of Christian students praying around the

flagpole or in the lunchroom is not uncommon; and Muslim students are routinely given a free room to perform daily prayers.

How we got here

What accounts for this dramatic turnaround? Start with the Equal Access Act of 1984 that opened the door for student-initiated religious clubs in secondary schools. Then look at how California broke the mold in the late '80s by deciding to require more teaching about religion in history classes. Finally, give credit to the remarkable agreements developed in the '90s on how schools should deal with everything from religious holidays to the Bible under the First Amendment — a series of consensus guides endorsed by everyone from the National Education Association to the National Association of Evangelicals.

In spite of these positive developments, some opponents of public schools stick to the storyline of the Godless school where guns get in the door but prayers are banned. These are the "Restorers," people who long to bring back the "good old days" when one religion (historically Protestant Christianity) was preferred in school policies and practices. Still angry that the courts won't allow school officials to promote religion with prayers over the intercom or by posting the Ten Commandments on classroom walls, the Restorers downplay or ignore all of the ways in which religion is alive and well in schools. Any concession that things have changed for the better would undermine their call for an "exodus" from "atheistic government schools," to quote a recent direct-mail letter from a religious conservative group.

Of course, it doesn't help that people on the other end of the spectrum — the "Removers" — are determined to scrub every vestige of religion from the classroom. Proposals to teach more about religions are attacked as backdoor ways to impose religion. Policies designed to protect students' religious expression are seen as efforts to encourage evangelization and harassment.

All it takes are a few bad stories to obscure the progress of the past two decades and to reinvigorate the culture warriors on both sides.

Exhibit A is the recent national brouhaha in which one teacher in one California school district (Cupertino) was accused of proselytizing in the classroom by inserting his religious views into the teaching of history. The Removers latched onto the incident as confirmation that teachers just can't be trusted to "teach about religion." Meanwhile, the Restorers saw it as fresh evidence of public-school hostility to all things Christian.


RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS



From Religious Liberty, Public Education, and the Future of American Democracy: A Statement of Principles , published by the First Amendment Center and endorsed by 24 organizations in 1995. The list includes a wide spectrum of religious and educational groups ranging from the Christian Coalition to the People for the American Way:
"Public schools may not inculcate nor inhibit religion. They must be places where religion and religious conviction are treated with fairness and respect.
"Public schools uphold the First Amendment when they protect the religious liberty rights of students of all faiths or none. Schools demonstrate fairness when they ensure that the curriculum includes study about religion, where appropriate, as an important part of a complete education."

Download the entire statement of principles at: www.firstamendment
center.org/about.aspx?id=6251

Caught in the crossfire, it's not surprising that some school officials are still nervous about implementing the consensus guidelines or that some teachers remain afraid to touch religion, whatever the standards say.

And it's no mystery why many students and parents are confused about what is and isn't allowed under the First Amendment. Nevertheless, the quiet revolution begun 20 years ago continues to spread.

All of the changes — the Equal Access Act, new standards and textbooks, consensus guides — are built on this: Under the First Amendment, public schools may not inculcate or inhibit religion. This means that school officials must be careful to protect the religious liberty rights of students of all faiths and none. And they must ensure that the curriculum includes study about religion (as distinguished from religious indoctrination) as an important part of a complete education.

Success in the classroom

To see what this looks like, visit Ramona, Calif.; Davis County, Utah; Mustang, Okla.; or any one of the many other school districts that have successfully translated the national agreements into local policies and practices that take the First Amendment seriously.

Instead of lawsuits and shouting matches, these communities have come together to find common ground on how to protect student religious expression while guarding against school endorsement of religion. Visit schools in these districts and you'll see teachers teaching about religions without controversy, students practicing their faith during the school day without interfering with the rights of others, and school officials handling potential conflicts over religion with the support and trust of their communities. Getting it right, however, won't be easy after more than 150 years of getting it wrong.

Moreover, agreement on some issues — such as the place of religion in the curriculum or when students may pray together — doesn't mean agreement on everything. The latest fight over evolution and recent lawsuits over where to draw the line on student religious expression in the classroom are stark reminders of how much work still needs to be done.

However great the challenge, schools have no choice but to move beyond the failed models of the past.

In a nation committed to religious liberty, public schools are neither the local church nor religion-free zones. They must be places where people of all faiths and none are treated with fairness and respect. In the USA, religion goes to school — but always through the First Amendment door.

Charles C. Haynes is the co-author of Finding Common Ground: A Guide to Religious Liberty in Public Schools and a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center in

 

[daws101]

So dummy how did the animals and humans get to Australia ?

Don't use terms you don't understand, you're are just making yourself look like you're full of shit which we already knew.

that's never stopped you...
well dummy...ever heard of plate tectonics? continental drift? you did know that at one point in time all of the continents were one super continent : Supercontinent" is a term used for a large landmass formed by the convergence of multiple continents. The most frequently referenced supercontinent is known as "Pangaea" (also "Pangea"), which existed approximately 225 million years ago. It is thought that all major continents at that time were assembled into the Pangaea supercontinent.
The supercontinent of Pangaea subsequently fragmented and the pieces now account for Earth's current continents. The geography of Pangaea and the more recent continent movements are shown the the map sequence below.

The theory of plate tectonics provides an explanation for these continent movements. According to this theory Earth's outer shell is divided into a series of plates. These plates consist of the crust and a small amount of the underlying mantle. The plates slide over a weak zone in the mantle at a rate of a few centimeters per year. Convection currents in the mantle, caused by the escape of heat from Earth's interior, are what drives the movement of these plates.

If you study the maps below you will see that the Atlantic Ocean is getting wider as a result of the plate movement. Also, the Pacific Ocean is closing. A new supercontinent might form when the Pacific Ocean completely closes and the continents surrounding it converge
Pangea Supercontinent - Pangaea Supercontinent - GEOLOGY.COM

Biogeography: Wallace and Wegener

Australia's fossil past - australia.gov.au

You tried to spin out of your dumb, uneducated comments, I won't let you off the hook this time.

how's that slapdick? as you have no line or hook to cast!
please present my uneducated statements!

 

[daws101]

How long was the first day?

you'd have to clarify, were there days when the galaxy was forming? was time even a factor during the formation ?
maybe this will be easier [ame=http://youtu.be/buqtdpuZxvk]Galaxy Song - YouTube[/ame]

God, through the Bible, frames what is meant by "day" in terms of what would become the standard for a day for Adam (...and the evening and the morning was the first.. second... third... day). God created for 12 hours and then rested 12 hours.

as stated before you have no quantifiable proof that god did anything.
funny if god created everything why was human kind the species that invented the clock?

 

[daws101]

Yes, I know it has, and his two fallacious arguments are completely unconvincing. His first argument, which attempts to dismantle abiogenesis with probability theory, is an argument from ignorance, since he nor anybody else has the numbers to describe accurately something we are ignorant to. I've mentioned this numerous times yet you fail to adequately address. Instead you simply deny it and try to ridicule me for always calling out fallacies, without ever refuting my claims. Next, Meyers makes an inductive argument, claiming that because we are intelligent and wrote specifiable, digital code, DNA must also have an intelligent designer, being a code with apparently the same characteristics. It does not follow necessarily that DNA must also have had am intelligent designer. It is only a probabilistic determination, which is the major weakness of inductively derived conclusions. So, both prongs of Meyers argument are blatantly fallacious. An inductive argument isn't even formally valid. Try to actually address these charges instead of the usual sidestepping and ridiculing to get around these blatant facts. You seem so enamored by Meyers false credentials, that won't admit to yourself, the possibility that he is wrong. You can still have your faith, just stop trying to prove religious claims in a scientific setting. It's never going to work. Just accept your delusion for what it is: an existential security blanket. At least, don't be deluded enough to think you are going to convince anybody here of your false beliefs. You're better off preaching the bible, since that is basically what you are trying to do- convince us of your god.

Speaking of repeating the same thing over and over again, I have refuted your claims of induction and to deny Meyers argument is valid is to deny Darwin's argument is valid. Both rely on evidence of causes now in operation, a fact which you conveniently continue to fail to address. Or, the logic of it just escapes you.

You haven't refuted any of my claims. Meyers does not rely on forces now in operation. He makes assumptions he is not justified in making, such as Pretending that his probabilities accurately describe anything. Tell me, how does he know what numbers to plug into his probabilities? How does he know his numbers are descriptive of what happened? He doesn't. He is just selling an idea, and you've bought it. Whether it not he is using forces now in operation doesn't save him from his use of an inductive argument. Try actually researching inductive reasoning so you can understand what he is doing, Although I am guessing you don't really want to find out how wrong he is. Your stupid equivalency of meyers argument to darwin's is laughable. Darwin had direct, demonstrable evidence for his claims. Meyers has none.

 

[daws101]

There are internal contradictions within the bible, which means it discredits itself, such as whether salvation is through faith alone, or faith and works. The bible offers both as a means to salvation, which is contradictory. Does god not even know the path To salvation that he supposedly offers? Or did he put that in the bible just to divide us, making it an evil god? Either way, your screwed.

Faith always comes first and then comes the works. The works are the sign of one's faith and are the result of the working of the Holy Spirit in the life of the saved individual. The works do not achieve salvation. The Law was God's illustration to man of perfection and man's inability to work his way to God. Only God Himself could keep the Law --- the Christ, the only begotten Son of God. Even the faith comes from God and not from within ourselves. God comes to the door of our inner being and knocks. We either accept or reject. When we accept our soul becomes moldable. If we reject God, one's soul becomes harder and harder. This is what happened to Pharoah and King Saul as examples...

I have not faired well with my actions sometimes in this thread.

Not so, you're an expert at believing in fairy tales, being willfully ignorant, quote mining, misrepresenting, braggadocio, bigotry, homophobia, hubris, pseudoscience.
all in all you're one of the most fabulous fuck up's I've ever met.
after 30 years in showbiz that's saying something.




 

 

[UltimateReality]

Faith always comes first and then comes the works. The works are the sign of one's faith and are the result of the working of the Holy Spirit in the life of the saved individual. The works do not achieve salvation. The Law was God's illustration to man of perfection and man's inability to work his way to God. Only God Himself could keep the Law --- the Christ, the only begotten Son of God. Even the faith comes from God and not from within ourselves. God comes to the door of our inner being and knocks. We either accept or reject. When we accept our soul becomes moldable. If we reject God, one's soul becomes harder and harder. This is what happened to Pharoah and King Saul as examples...

I have not faired well with my actions sometimes in this thread.

Not so, you're an expert at believing in fairy tales, being willfully ignorant, quote mining, misrepresenting, braggadocio, bigotry, homophobia, hubris, pseudoscience.
all in all you're one of the most fabulous fuck up's I've ever met.
after 30 years in showbiz that's saying something.

 

Whatever, Pot.

 

[LittleNipper]

Faith always comes first and then comes the works. The works are the sign of one's faith and are the result of the working of the Holy Spirit in the life of the saved individual. The works do not achieve salvation. The Law was God's illustration to man of perfection and man's inability to work his way to God. Only God Himself could keep the Law --- the Christ, the only begotten Son of God. Even the faith comes from God and not from within ourselves. God comes to the door of our inner being and knocks. We either accept or reject. When we accept our soul becomes moldable. If we reject God, one's soul becomes harder and harder. This is what happened to Pharoah and King Saul as examples...

I have not faired well with my actions sometimes in this thread.

Not so, you're an expert at believing in fairy tales, being willfully ignorant, quote mining, misrepresenting, braggadocio, bigotry, homophobia, hubris, pseudoscience.
all in all you're one of the most fabulous f--k up's I've ever met.
after 30 years in showbiz that's saying something.




 

Actually, it would seem you are a bigot, as you base your own opinions on how you feel and not on what God reveals/teaches. Judge not lest ye be judged. Your own opinion is not a reason to disrespect someone. Homosexuality is non productive. It is founded on self debasement and the misuse of the human body. God's Word is very clear in this regard. And the random use of deragatory terms for sexual encounters is only another symptom of a negative self righteous destructive society promoting hedonism.

 

[LittleNipper]

you'd have to clarify, were there days when the galaxy was forming? was time even a factor during the formation ?
maybe this will be easier Galaxy Song - YouTube

God, through the Bible, frames what is meant by "day" in terms of what would become the standard for a day for Adam (...and the evening and the morning was the first.. second... third... day). God created for 12 hours and then rested 12 hours.

as stated before you have no quantifiable proof that god did anything.
funny if god created everything why was human kind the species that invented the clock?

God created man in His own image ------ and that includes a creative spirit. God created life. Can you create life?

 

[Hollie]

God, through the Bible, frames what is meant by "day" in terms of what would become the standard for a day for Adam (...and the evening and the morning was the first.. second... third... day). God created for 12 hours and then rested 12 hours.

as stated before you have no quantifiable proof that god did anything.
funny if god created everything why was human kind the species that invented the clock?

God created man in His own image ------ and that includes a creative spirit. God created life. Can you create life?

,
What leads you to believe your partisan gawds, as opposed to other gawds, created anything?

 

[newpolitics]

What evidence contradicts the Bible, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

There are internal contradictions within the bible, which means it discredits itself, such as whether salvation is through faith alone, or faith and works. The bible offers both as a means to salvation, which is contradictory. Does god not even know the path To salvation that he supposedly offers? Or did he put that in the bible just to divide us, making it an evil god? Either way, your screwed.

Faith always comes first and then comes the works. The works are the sign of one's faith and are the result of the working of the Holy Spirit in the life of the saved individual. The works do not achieve salvation. The Law was God's illustration to man of perfection and man's inability to work his way to God. Only God Himself could keep the Law --- the Christ, the only begotten Son of God. Even the faith comes from God and not from within ourselves. God comes to the door of our inner being and knocks. We either accept or reject. When we accept our soul becomes moldable. If we reject God, one's soul becomes harder and harder. This is what happened to Pharoah and King Saul as examples...

The bible explicitly claims two distinct ways to salvation. Faith alone, or faith and works. There can't be two ways. It is a contradiction. Thus, falsifying the bible as having any truth value.

 

[newpolitics]

Speaking of repeating the same thing over and over again, I have refuted your claims of induction and to deny Meyers argument is valid is to deny Darwin's argument is valid. Both rely on evidence of causes now in operation, a fact which you conveniently continue to fail to address. Or, the logic of it just escapes you.

You haven't refuted any of my claims. Meyers does not rely on forces now in operation. He makes assumptions he is not justified in making, such as Pretending that his probabilities accurately describe anything. Tell me, how does he know what numbers to plug into his probabilities? How does he know his numbers are descriptive of what happened? He doesn't. He is just selling an idea, and you've bought it. Whether it not he is using forces now in operation doesn't save him from his use of an inductive argument. Try actually researching inductive reasoning so you can understand what he is doing, Although I am guessing you don't really want to find out how wrong he is. Your stupid equivalency of meyers argument to darwin's is laughable. Darwin had direct, demonstrable evidence for his claims. Meyers has none.

Meyer does too: No complex, information with specificity exists in nature unless it has an intelligent agent as its source, period. Or put another way, ALL functional, complex information has an intelligent agent as its source. This is a hypothesis that will become a law eventually until you prove otherwise. However, you are too blind to even have a logical discussion with, as evidenced by this post. Logic escapes you so what is the point in arguing with you?

There is only one species that we know of who is "intelligent," by our own definition: us. We are therefore, by definition, the ONLY Known intelligent source of specifiable, complex information. My point: you are begging the question, and your sample size is far too small to generalize this to then claim that "all specifiable, complex information is created by intelligence." So small, as to make your argument laughable. Your sample size is n=1. Are you serious? Your inductive argument is so incredibly weak. Even if we knew of a million intelligent species who created specifiable information, that doesn't mean that the next unknown example of information is necessarily made by an intelligence. You can never make that conclusion without direct evidence. This is the fallacy of inductive reasoning. You could never claim with any certainty, therefore t will never be a law.

What you are doing is the equivalent of seeing a red apple for first time and saying, "this red apple has seeds and is round, therefore anything that has seeds and is round is also a red apple." This is the level of your arrogance. There are green apples, yellow apples, etc...You can't generalize to all apples being red based on the first apple you saw. Yet, this is what you are doing while looking at human created information. Even more arrogant is that you are the one defining us as intelligent. Therefore, you are defining this conclusion into existence. It is begging the question, yet another fallacy.

 

[LittleNipper]

as stated before you have no quantifiable proof that god did anything.
funny if god created everything why was human kind the species that invented the clock?

God created man in His own image ------ and that includes a creative spirit. God created life. Can you create life?

,
What leads you to believe your partisan gawds, as opposed to other gawds, created anything?

Jesus Christ

 

[LittleNipper]

There are internal contradictions within the bible, which means it discredits itself, such as whether salvation is through faith alone, or faith and works. The bible offers both as a means to salvation, which is contradictory. Does god not even know the path To salvation that he supposedly offers? Or did he put that in the bible just to divide us, making it an evil god? Either way, your screwed.

Faith always comes first and then comes the works. The works are the sign of one's faith and are the result of the working of the Holy Spirit in the life of the saved individual. The works do not achieve salvation. The Law was God's illustration to man of perfection and man's inability to work his way to God. Only God Himself could keep the Law --- the Christ, the only begotten Son of God. Even the faith comes from God and not from within ourselves. God comes to the door of our inner being and knocks. We either accept or reject. When we accept our soul becomes moldable. If we reject God, one's soul becomes harder and harder. This is what happened to Pharoah and King Saul as examples...

The bible explicitly claims two distinct ways to salvation. Faith alone, or faith and works. There can't be two ways. It is a contradiction. Thus, falsifying the bible as having any truth value.

You have never read the book of Hebrews I can see. Faith without some sort of evidence does not exist, but works without faith is worthless.
Hebrews 11
New King James Version (NKJV)

By Faith We Understand
11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good testimony.

3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

Faith at the Dawn of History
4 By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it he being dead still speaks.

5 By faith Enoch was taken away so that he did not see death, “and was not found, because God had taken him”; for before he was taken he had this testimony, that he pleased God. 6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

7 By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.

Faithful Abraham
8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he dwelt in the land of promise as in a foreign country, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; 10 for he waited for the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

11 By faith Sarah herself also received strength to conceive seed, and she bore a child when she was past the age, because she judged Him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born as many as the stars of the sky in multitude—innumerable as the sand which is by the seashore.

The Heavenly Hope
13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off were assured of them, embraced them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 14 For those who say such things declare plainly that they seek a homeland. 15 And truly if they had called to mind that country from which they had come out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But now they desire a better, that is, a heavenly country. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared a city for them.

The Faith of the Patriarchs
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, 18 of whom it was said, “In Isaac your seed shall be called,” 19 concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense.

20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.

21 By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, and worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff.

22 By faith Joseph, when he was dying, made mention of the departure of the children of Israel, and gave instructions concerning his bones.

The Faith of Moses
23 By faith Moses, when he was born, was hidden three months by his parents, because they saw he was a beautiful child; and they were not afraid of the king’s command.

24 By faith Moses, when he became of age, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, 25 choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin, 26 esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked to the reward.

27 By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king; for he endured as seeing Him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the Passover and the sprinkling of blood, lest he who destroyed the firstborn should touch them.

29 By faith they passed through the Red Sea as by dry land, whereas the Egyptians, attempting to do so, were drowned.

By Faith They Overcame
30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were encircled for seven days. 31 By faith the harlot Rahab did not perish with those who did not believe, when she had received the spies with peace.

32 And what more shall I say? For the time would fail me to tell of Gideon and Barak and Samson and Jephthah, also of David and Samuel and the prophets: 33 who through faith subdued kingdoms, worked righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, became valiant in battle, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. 35 Women received their dead raised to life again.

Others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection. 36 Still others had trial of mockings and scourgings, yes, and of chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, were tempted, were slain with the sword. They wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented— 38 of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts and mountains, in dens and caves of the earth.

39 And all these, having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise, 40 God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us.

 

[Youwerecreated]

that's never stopped you...
well dummy...ever heard of plate tectonics? continental drift? you did know that at one point in time all of the continents were one super continent : Supercontinent" is a term used for a large landmass formed by the convergence of multiple continents. The most frequently referenced supercontinent is known as "Pangaea" (also "Pangea"), which existed approximately 225 million years ago. It is thought that all major continents at that time were assembled into the Pangaea supercontinent.
The supercontinent of Pangaea subsequently fragmented and the pieces now account for Earth's current continents. The geography of Pangaea and the more recent continent movements are shown the the map sequence below.

The theory of plate tectonics provides an explanation for these continent movements. According to this theory Earth's outer shell is divided into a series of plates. These plates consist of the crust and a small amount of the underlying mantle. The plates slide over a weak zone in the mantle at a rate of a few centimeters per year. Convection currents in the mantle, caused by the escape of heat from Earth's interior, are what drives the movement of these plates.

If you study the maps below you will see that the Atlantic Ocean is getting wider as a result of the plate movement. Also, the Pacific Ocean is closing. A new supercontinent might form when the Pacific Ocean completely closes and the continents surrounding it converge
Pangea Supercontinent - Pangaea Supercontinent - GEOLOGY.COM

Biogeography: Wallace and Wegener

Australia's fossil past - australia.gov.au

You tried to spin out of your dumb, uneducated comments, I won't let you off the hook this time.

how's that slapdick? as you have no line or hook to cast!
please present my uneducated statements!

You said it in your posts. One was attacking the theory migration was due to land bridges and that is how animals got to Australia.The other was to suggest Australia was never flooded or under water.