The bible

[thedepressedsquirrel]

I reworded it for fun

 

 

 

UltimateWin+++

[Defender2516]

Yeah prove you wrong, in the name of Science.. a half working evolution system made by imperfect humans.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fact is 100% Evidence, but in Science, Fact is Changable. Truth is not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you want me to go dig up some sources man created to prove you wrong, when man thinks the earth is flat? right right..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I get it now.. see back in the day man was wrong, but now their completely correct because of technology..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What makes man so special now than he was before? We have more knowledge, but we don't have any more proof that the earth is 10 billions years old than 10k years old.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And most likely, we will never know this answer. Some things in life we will never have a answer to.. and you can keep saying "man said this, man said that" (replace man with science)..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That will be the day when man makes a 100% fool proof system. To bad it will never happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All Man can do is discover what God has already placed in the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aww.. someone deleted my reword post.. guess Admins don't care for alittle fun or discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh well, off 2 a place where they don't care what people type.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

[warri0r45]

Yeah prove you wrong, in the name of Science.. a half working evolution system made by imperfect humans.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fact is 100% Evidence, but in Science, Fact is Changable. Truth is not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you want me to go dig up some sources man created to prove you wrong, when man thinks the earth is flat? right right..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I get it now.. see back in the day man was wrong, but now their completely correct because of technology..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What makes man so special now than he was before? We have more knowledge, but we don't have any more proof that the earth is 10 billions years old than 10k years old.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And most likely, we will never know this answer. Some things in life we will never have a answer to.. and you can keep saying "man said this, man said that" (replace man with science)..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That will be the day when man makes a 100% fool proof system. To bad it will never happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All Man can do is discover what God has already placed in the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aww.. someone deleted my reword post.. guess Admins don't care for alittle fun or discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh well, off 2 a place where they don't care what people type.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The fact that you don't like science or the way it is performed has no bearing on the techniques (such as radiometric dating) that scientists have used to calculate the earths age at approximately 4.5 billion years old. I could provide you with some sources if you'd like.

[BlueLancer]

 

 

 

What makes man so special now than he was before? We have more knowledge, but we don't have any more proof that the earth is 10 billions years old than 10k years old.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We do. Please read my post above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And most likely, we will never know this answer. Some things in life we will never have a answer to.. and you can keep saying "man said this, man said that" (replace man with science)..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Science is not a religion. Let's look it up in a dictionary:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Science:

 

 

 

a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The American HeritageÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâî Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Science only accepts what can be proven true through empirical evidence and TESTING. Science can prove you are 0-100 years old. Science can prove a tree is 300 years old. Science can prove a rock is 200 million years old. Science can prove why you breathe and why your heart beats.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's not magic or superstition. Science is not "made up". Science is another word for "that which has been tested and can be observed by anybody to be true".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P.S: Altering quotes is not allowed as per the forum rules, you've recieved a warning.

[Celt23]

To dispell all the "prove humans evolved from single-celled organisms":

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is evolution? Biological evolution is the change that species (kinds of living things) undergo over time. More precisely, it is the change in the gene pools of living populations of species which occurs over time. A gene is a hereditary unit that can be passed on unaltered for many generations. A gene pool is the set of all genes in a species or population.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What do you mean by ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬ÅEvolution HappensÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬ÃâÃ

[Defender2516]

Oh my bad, I didn't know changing quotse was morally wrong and deadly to forum users. -.-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But anyways, Science will only prove the Bible to be true, whether you believe that or not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yup, you can call me arrogant, have been many times, but all I get out of Science nuts is 3 words screamed in my face saying I am wasting my time believe in God.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"EVIDENCE EVIDENCE EVIDENCE!!!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

[BlueLancer]

 

 

 

Yup, you can call me arrogant, have been many times, but all I get out of Science nuts is 3 words screamed in my face saying I am wasting my time believe in God.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"EVIDENCE EVIDENCE EVIDENCE!!!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not a science nut. I'm not even an atheist. Still I think you're one of the most ignorant posters on this thread, you're rejecting evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What's evidence? An apple is red. This was seen by 6 billion people, everybody can see it's red. That's evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The world war II did happen. 500 million old people remember fighting in it even if you weren't alive. They all have no reason to lie. There's video tapes, there's photographs. That's evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The world was created in about 4.57 billion years. Read about it. That page has been edited by scholars with over 30 years of experience. Edit it if you feel like you're right.

[Defender2516]

 

 

 

 

Yup, you can call me arrogant, have been many times, but all I get out of Science nuts is 3 words screamed in my face saying I am wasting my time believe in God.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"EVIDENCE EVIDENCE EVIDENCE!!!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not a science nut. I'm not even an atheist. Still I think you're one of the most ignorant posters on this thread, you're rejecting evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What's evidence? An apple is red. This was seen by 6 billion people, everybody can see it's red. That's evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The world war II did happen. 500 million old people remember fighting in it even if you weren't alive. They all have no reason to lie. There's video tapes, there's photographs. That's evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The world was created in about 4.57 billion years. Read about it. That page has been edited by scholars with over 30 years of experience. Edit it if you feel like you're right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Negative, Evidence on Mans Best Guesses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is a apple red? Yes 6 billion can agree.

 

 

 

Did World War 2 happen? Yes, 6 billion can agree.

 

 

 

Is the world billions of years old? Uhh.. a few dozen peeps can agree..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

[warri0r45]

 

 

 

 

 

Yup, you can call me arrogant, have been many times, but all I get out of Science nuts is 3 words screamed in my face saying I am wasting my time believe in God.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"EVIDENCE EVIDENCE EVIDENCE!!!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not a science nut. I'm not even an atheist. Still I think you're one of the most ignorant posters on this thread, you're rejecting evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What's evidence? An apple is red. This was seen by 6 billion people, everybody can see it's red. That's evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The world war II did happen. 500 million old people remember fighting in it even if you weren't alive. They all have no reason to lie. There's video tapes, there's photographs. That's evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The world was created in about 4.57 billion years. Read about it. That page has been edited by scholars with over 30 years of experience. Edit it if you feel like you're right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Negative, Evidence on Mans Best Guesses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is a apple red? Yes 6 billion can agree.

 

 

 

Did World War 2 happen? Yes, 6 billion can agree.

 

 

 

Is the world billions of years old? Uhh.. a few dozen peeps can agree..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you call tens of thousands of world leading geologists, physicists and mathematians a few dozen then you really do have your head in the sand. Man's best guess is a culmination of years of work and thousands of minds put together for the same goal. If you don't accept any part of what they have to say, I'm sure they will be big boys about it, not care in the slightest and just get on with the job. You are forgetting that science is the best way to explain the universe we live in. You can thank scientific revelations for the fact that you're not living like a caveman so please, try not to bite the hand that feeds.

[tripsis]

Lets try to keep a bit more on topic, shall we? :shame:

[Rebdragon]

Lets try to keep a bit more on topic, shall we? :shame:

 

 

 

Geez you're fast o_O.

[BlueLancer]

 

 

 

Is a apple red? Yes 6 billion can agree.

 

 

 

Did World War 2 happen? Yes, 6 billion can agree.

 

 

 

Is the world billions of years old? Uhh.. a few dozen peeps can agree..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This rules you out from the realm of "to be taken seriously" posters. I should just ignore your posts and delete any flames. I presented you evidence, proof, you ignore it. You showed me nothing. No thanks, this isn't a discussion, this is a sandbox fight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, feel free to edit this website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_earth

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It encourages correction from users who can correct facts. I'm sure you know better than they do. Have fun editing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why are you on a discussion forum if you aren't ready to discuss and debate?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And is it so hard to accept you can still be a muslim, christian, mormon, hindu or whatever you are and still accept biological facts?

[Defender2516]

The reason being why I am not being serious about it.. is a few..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. You cannot convince anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. Most people who use Science, rather use it to disprove God than to prove him. And if anyone trys to, their nuts. So you want me to become a Science man.. waste my time.. just to say "your wrong, here's why", which leads back to point 1. You cannot convince anyone. 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Superiority. I am no better than anyone here.. but i noticed most users who have learned somethign in their life time come off thinking their some brilliant scientist when they got all their information probably from watching TV. Too much "lol your a noob cuz you don't know.."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. The same. As many forums I have been in, its always the same. You got the christian, the athiest, and the science nut. Usually it seems that athiests and science are on the same side, leaving the christian to be doubled teamed with all kinds of flames.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5. They believe in incest, nuff said. If people want me to take them seriously, they shouldn't ask for proof on every little thing. My god, if you need a website coder from a offical source, which the government sets up to tell YOU that incest is wrong or right, you have issues.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So.. the point is.. why should I be serious when it will all lead down to 1 thing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The incest Scientist who believes killing is A OK and no God isn't real, thinks your a moron because you don't know what carbon is, which proves God doesn't exist.. and all your praise and worship is in vain because Science is superior..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I coudl go on and on and on..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But the simple fact is.. PEOPLE DON'T KNOW JACK. They come on these forums acting like they found the book of life and know how everythign happened, and then go on a rant on how their giong to critize EVERYONE because they don't know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its always the same on the forums.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can't convince, debating is vain, and the world will continue its course reguardless of what anyone's opinions is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So.. why do you want me to take the subject seriously? Or should I start looking up some websites "for evidence" sake?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

[BlueLancer]

Or should I start looking up some websites "for evidence" sake?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, if you want to continue the debate. If you don't, simply leave the thread. There are plenty of other people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. You cannot convince anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm convinced on anything as long as it's rational and there's proof. If you aren't, you're stubborn. I like to be a realist, I don't view thing how I like them to be, I view them how they are. If somebody can prove me wrong in any subject, I always accept the reality of the situation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I recently thought it's not possible for a 2-year old to be able to read, guess what: It is. I got sufficient proof on another forum, saw a document on it with the child involved, what is there left to debate?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If there was proof islam, christianity or whatever was the 'true' religion, don't you think everybody would follow them?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wouldn't it be good if all humans had a future after their lives, and there was a simple explanation to the origin of life? Who wouldn't want that? I would.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But that's just a belief, and beliefs without facts have no merit. If I should pick between dumb faith and what can be observed, I pick the latter.

[Defender2516]

 

Or should I start looking up some websites "for evidence" sake?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, if you want to continue the debate. If you don't, simply leave the thread. There are plenty of other people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. You cannot convince anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm convinced on anything as long as it's rational and there's proof. If you aren't, you're stubborn. I like to be a realist, I don't view thing how I like them to be, I view them how they are. If somebody can prove me wrong in any subject, I always accept the reality of the situation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I recently thought it's not possible for a 2-year old to be able to read, guess what: It is. I got sufficient proof on another forum, saw a document on it with the child involved, what is there left to debate?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If there was proof islam, christianity or whatever was the 'true' religion, don't you think everybody would follow them?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wouldn't it be good if all humans had a future after their lives, and there was a simple explanation to the origin of life? Who wouldn't want that? I would.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But that's just a belief, and beliefs without facts have no merit. If I should pick between dumb faith and what can be observed, I pick the latter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I use what I know to refer information between debates (who doesn't?)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, the Bible is not considred "proof" in threads which is where most of my information comes from. No, I don't read Science books to know what chemicals can create, its not in my intrest, but the bible is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, just because tis not Evidence, I can't use scriptures because then, most people will just say "eh, some old dude 2k years ago wrote that.. you HAVE NOTHING!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But this is what I do know, Jesus said the the most important commandent was love and love thy neighbor.. Right?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So I'm suppose to follow this, while at the same time, enduring noobism, LOL, idiot, fool, I love incest morality, Defender you suck, insert creative insult here, and more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Honestly, some things in life that are common sense are no longer considered common sense and are being questioned as if it really is right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I base my life and foundation on the Bible and its principals on how I should live my life.. but I can't come in here and say anything because its not "evidence".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And you know whats happening because of it? Just watch the news.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

[BlueLancer]

 

 

 

I use what I know to refer information between debates (who doesn't?)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, the Bible is not considred "proof" in threads which is where most of my information comes from.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Because a biblical scripture doesn't have authority. It was written by humans. Anyone can write a story. Just look at some eastern religions, my friend told me the basics of some hindu deities. Some of them have 5 hands and throw thunders. People *really* believe in those.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What makes the Bible any different?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There's nothing wrong if you base your life on biblical morals and objectives. However, you can't present any supernatural events in it as facts, because they can't be reproduced and tested.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No human can walk on water or create food out of nothing. There aren't even any supernatural events taped or photographed, they've all turned out to be fakes. There is nothing to suggest that all of a sudden, 2000 years ago, some person could had done those things.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Science doesn't tell you how to live, if that's what you want. Then use the Bible. Science tells you how life exists, not from a superstitious viewpoint, but factual recreation of scenarios and facts that have been gathered by radiometric dating, fossil ages, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The age of certain objects in the world is no less a fact than the fact you have a heart and lungs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How do you know you have a heart, a kidney..? That's not faith, science can prove you can't live without those. Every living human must have at least one kidney and a heart. You haven't touched your kidney or liver, but they still exist.

[assassin_696]

They come on these forums acting like they found the book of life

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, the irony. :roll:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You really are ignorant aren't you? It's quite clear that you don't have an interest in science, or indeed any reasonable or logical thought process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There's so much I could say to you, but let me tell you this. I'm a critical, questioning guy. I don't accept things blindly, I don't just accept the facts as truth. That's why i'm not a christian, but nor am I an atheist. But I trust in science, because the facts that have been tested and tested time and time again really are the truth. As i've said before, there isn't much in science that we don't know now, especially about the Earth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you want to talk about making sense, and loving your neighbour, try posting in a more reasonable style. Living your life and basing your moral decisions on the Bible is fine, but don't try and base facts on a book that's several thousand years old (or indeed all your moral decisions, what about situation ethics?).

[warri0r45]

Totally agree with you there assassin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Defender, from what we have been discussing today, you would have to be the most ignorant, naieve, narrow minded individual I have ever met on these forums. And you wonder why this is so? Mate, open your mind, what the bible says is not th entirety of existance and scientists aren't wrong or evil (99% of the time :wink: ). Seriously, I'm trying to help you here as a last effort, don't just come to blind conclusions, try and form logical arguments on a source other than the bible or people will cut you down in flames and think your nuts, whether you see it or not.

[Satenza]

lots

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thats the most ironic post i have ever read.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The fact is you are using a falliable book to produce infalliable 'rules' of how we all must live. When in actual fact by following such stories and taking their meaning you could justify pretty much anything. Such as the man who killed a docter outside his abortion clinic because he thought it was a justified killing. His friend backed up the killing and beleived his (executed) friend to be in heaven celebrating the murder of a docter with Jesus. What a pretty fairytale.

[Sumpta]

Oh the blasphemy, but I'd like to quote from Pirates of the Caribbean: "The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Bible is for the main part a set of metaphorical stories, which address the christian code. I studied at the university with the most renowned catholic theologists of the world. Even they are still debating and discussing about the origin, the genealogy, the interpretation and the translation (!!!!) of the Bible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The doctrine was distilled from the bible. That is not the same as the bible being a prescriptive book. There are parts (a minority) that are prescriptive, but I also think they are dated from a later period. (But I'm not an expert on the subject.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, it's very important to know that the doctrine as we know it today, does NOT stem from the time of Jesus, but from the early and later Middle Ages. Other concerns than the pure godly played their role. Political reasons, personal power, money and a desire to control society were often just as important (if not more).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It bugs me that people can take the bible so decidedly literal, while it's a prime example of the metaphorical (stories, tales) method to teach people values.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Being religious is not the same as not being allowed to think. The bible is a good basis to distill values from, within the keeping of christian religion. I think the bible can be very valuable to people, to give them a sense of direction and meaning in a way which science cannot. But reading the Bible needn't exclude reason and sound common sense.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Keep in mind that the basis of christianity is understanding, compassion and non-exclusion. I sometimes have a hard time finding a trace of these values in hard core fundamentalists, who abuse the Holy Book, turn about phrases and/or extract them from their context and the time in which they were written.

[warri0r45]

Oh the blasphemy, but I'd like to quote from Pirates of the Caribbean: "The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Bible is for the main part a set of metaphorical stories, which address the christian code. I studied at the university with the most renowned catholic theologists of the world. Even they are still debating and discussing about the origin, the genealogy, the interpretation and the translation (!!!!) of the Bible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The doctrine was distilled from the bible. That is not the same as the bible being a prescriptive book. There are parts (a minority) that are prescriptive, but I also think they are dated from a later period. (But I'm not an expert on the subject.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, it's very important to know that the doctrine as we know it today, does NOT stem from the time of Jesus, but from the early and later Middle Ages. Other concerns than the pure godly played their role. Political reasons, personal power, money and a desire to control society were often just as important (if not more).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It bugs me that people can take the bible so decidedly literal, while it's a prime example of the metaphorical (stories, tales) method to teach people values.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Being religious is not the same as not being allowed to think. The bible is a good basis to distill values from, within the keeping of christian religion. I think the bible can be very valuable to people, to give them a sense of direction and meaning in a way which science cannot. But reading the Bible needn't exclude reason and sound common sense.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Keep in mind that the basis of christianity is understanding, compassion and non-exclusion. I sometimes have a hard time finding a trace of these values in hard core fundamentalists, who abuse the Holy Book, turn about phrases and/or extract them from their context and the time in which they were written.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well written there sumpta, I couldn't agree more. People (the hardcore fundamentalists) take the bible much to literally in sacrifice of common sense it seems.

[Tigra00]

Again, being a fundamentalist is just embarassing to yourself. It really is. Do you not realize how stupid it sounds saying that the Earth itself is only 10,000 years old? 6,000 isn't even plausible in the slightest, so the Kent Hovind cult needs to hush-it-up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I like how Defender twists facts to his liking to make his theory sound more plausible, though...Like how he feels only a "few dozen" people believe in evolution. Ha. Half of the world isn't religious in the slightest and they obviously don't believe we were put here by God. Or magic pixies, for that matter. People usually accept science for what it is because there are thousands of scientists working on stuff and coming to agreement. Are humans imperfect? Yes, they are, but that doesn't mean everything we've ever done scientifically is flawed. Does your computer work correctly? Your car? How about the artificial heart your uncle bob has? Does that work? And did God create these things? No, humans did. Those stupid, stupid, imperfect humans.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you're going to try to back up the Bible, use some hardcore facts. And trust me, they need to be hardcore. There are few religious people I can come to respect, because they babble on about stuff like this without proof, only opinions and the whole "God makes it possible because he is God" rhetoric. However, Barihawk posted something about Sulfur balls found all around the sites of what they believe is Sodom and Gomorrah. In all fairness, I haven't gotten the time to look up any possible scientific explaination to that, but that's pretty good evidence for *something* above what is natural happening. God, aliens, who the hell knows, but the Bible says it was God. I can't explain what it'd be otherwise, personally. So how about doing research from places OTHER than the Bible? It might help you, but watch out - it's that crazy science crap you hate so much. It might not be sulfur afterall...It might be banana's left by apes who used to rule this planet. Oh my! :roll:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another interesting thing is the whole thing about the Ark, and the people who keep thinking they've been finding it. Those really big drough-stones they found are some pretty nice evidence, but they were touched by the Crusaders, so even if they are from an Ark, the "evidence" has been tainted and someone can suggest they were placed there. I don't believe they were, but someone could say that. Don't get me wrong, however...Even if they did find "The Ark", that thing NEVER held all the animals on this planet. It would have been impossible unless God were somehow poofing these animals into the boat and then holding it together with his own hands, because otherwise, the damn thing would have fallen apart, and all the animals on, say, North America, Australia, etc, would all be extict. Unless, of course, God interfered.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See that's why people don't believe. God would have had to do all this stuff with his own hands, then put all those animals back and make sure they reproduced. However, with Evolution, we can clearly see that all the continents were once connected as one, and thats why there are some species of animals on two or more different continents. Without the direct interference of God himself, it is absolutely impossible for anything on North America, Australia, etc, to even exist. That's why it's so unbelievable. People don't want to believe everything just poofed into existence. That's not exciting, and it isn't science. I don't want to believe that God would do all of this stuff and conveniently try to disprove himself in the process. Afterall, he wants people to believe, not NOT believe. And it's pretty hard to have faith when the evidence says it never happened. Honestly, how many of you here that believe in God were not raised from birth to believe in him? Like, zero? Most grown adults CAN'T believe in God later in life unless they're raised to believe. It's just not plausible to them. Thus my personal dilemma. I'd like to believe in God, but I cannot. I do not have the capacity in my mind to think of it as even plausible anymore. Why do you think religion brain-washes kids? Kids don't know any better. If you raise them to think it's okay to toss your friends into a meat grinder, then obviously they're going to have a lot of dead friends! If you raise them to believe in God, then they will. If you raise them not to have any thoughts on the matter, they won't be able to believe later in life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Shrug*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You shouldn't be arguing that the Earth is young, and you shouldn't be arguing against science. Science is right, and you're wrong. What you should be saying is that dinosaurs were a failed experiment by God, which he destroyed and that Early humans were the children of angels and humans - the Nephilim. Though, sadly, the stories say they were giants, and we've found no "Giant" remains...Early humans were shorter than us.

[Sumpta]

Again, being a fundamentalist is just embarassing to yourself. It really is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fundamentalism is not restricted to religious fanatics. As I see it, scientist-fanatics can be/are just as fundamentalist in their beliefs. I often see striking resemblances between two completely opposite enemies: the adamant and unreasonable manner in which they stick to their guns, without considering the other party's feelings and opinions.

[Satenza]

Thats true, however the scientist fundementalists are not going on blind faith. They are going from experience and evidence which draws a line between them.

[warri0r45]

 

Again, being a fundamentalist is just embarassing to yourself. It really is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fundamentalism is not restricted to religious fanatics. As I see it, scientist-fanatics can be/are just as fundamentalist in their beliefs. I often see striking resemblances between two completely opposite enemies: the adamant and unreasonable manner in which they stick to their guns, without considering the other party's feelings and opinions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The difference there is that fundamentalist scientists have basically no evidence to lay base to thier claim (which is basically what science relies on) and as a result no scientist with two shreds of integrity or brainpower will listen to them. Fundamentalist Christians also have no evidence to lay base to thier claim, yet they have the propoganda factor as I call it; raising young kids on a strict diet of 'this is the way it is' and 'never let anyone question the way you think.'