[_ Old Earth _] Evolution Vs Evolution Concerning Textbooks

[Rebecka]

Victorhadin says.........that I have

1) Failed to define, in a testable fashion, order or disorder.
2) Failed to define the absolute 'right' and 'wrong' you allude to.
3) Failed to define absolute 'excellence'.
4) Failed to provide a reasoned hypothetical model of creationism (necessary for scientific analysis).
5) Failed to back up with empirical evidence your assertion that technological and scientific advance is down to god.
6) Completely ignored all my examples of speciation, transitional fossils etc etc, hoping that they will go away if you don't mention them.


But....in truth
1. It is not my fault you have failed to understand anything I posted.
2.There are no transitional fossils and it is not my fault that you think there are.
3. The sane majority that rule and govern this world do not agree with anything you say.
4.Prove your posts have merit by taking Kent Hovind up on his offer.
He is my brother in Christ and I do depend on him to do what is right.
5. You're an atheist, which places you at a disadvantage to begin with, as the Sacred Text says you are a fool.
6. I considered that when I started posting to you.
7. Order and disorder are understandable even to a child.


The Bible tells me you will continue to insist you're correct. I never say I'm correct, but God IS correct and perfect and He says you are wrong.

The Bible refutes you, Victohadin whether you see it or not.

Kent Hovind doesn't ask you to recreate the universe, but he asks for a simple proof of evolution happening right now and you have failed to provide any proof of any of your claims because you're unable to prove what is false.

Your ridiculous "old hat" argument about "pink unicorn" under your bed was refuted when I said......"If your pink unicorn inspired millions to build cathedrals and churches to worship him in, and if countless books were written about your pink unicorn's life, and movies were made to tell of your pink unicorn's life, and if lives were changed and miracles performed by believing in your pink unicorn, if all history was dated from the birth of your pink unicorn and if movies, videos, dvd's, cd's cassettes, records, were produced with songs about your pink unicorn, if a whole month was set aside by the greatest nation on the planet to celebrate the birthday of your pink unicorn, if your pink unicorn's name was engraved on books, clothes, etc., if the greatest selling book on planet earth was about your pink unicorn, if numberless beautiful songs were written about your pink unicorn, then YES, any sane thinking person would seruiously look into your pink unicorn's claims!


If all the atheists in the world went to Washington D.C. and asked for an audience with the president of the great USA, and his men to prove that there is no God, they would be laughed at, if not locked up immediatley by those in authority. Or if atheists went to Spain, or England, or any country and proclaimed atheism, they would either be laughed at, locked up, but never taken seriously. Russia tried atheism and failed miserably, even Gorbachev said that atheism was destroying his country.

Wake up, Victohadin, your beliefs are not even a footnote in the progress of humanity and it's claims. Atheism is a joke, a stain on any society and the only reason atheists exist is because God allows it.

I posted here not because I thought or believed you had anything of merit to offer, but to plant a seed from God in your mind because somewhere down the line, God will remind you of some things I told you, of some things other christians told you and you will be without excuse.

 

[Bryan]

I just re-read Hovinds offer. It says nothing about disproving the existance of God, or anything like that. All it says is prove that macro-evolution is a provable fact, rather than just a theory. You need empirical evidence that it's the only way it could have happened.

The only "trick" in Hovind's offer, is he knows that such evidence doesn't exist.

 

[victorhadin]

Victorhadin says.........that I have

But....in truth
1. It is not my fault you have failed to understand anything I posted.

You haven't even explained why all the assertion you have posted is true. You haven't given any backing reason to bolster your claims. If you say 'God inspires all that is right' it is not the job of your protagonist to debunk that, but for you to support your statement. You haven't.

[quote:bb3f8]2.There are no transitional fossils and it is not my fault that you think there are.

Again; raw assertion. Go through the examples I gave and criticise their particulars if you will, but don't sit their and repeat yourself in the hope that unbacked assertion sounds better in stereo.

3. The sane majority that rule and govern this world do not agree with anything you say.

Refer back to my comments on the logical fallacy of argument by numerical vote. The majority in this world are not even literate, and most are certainly not scientifically literate. The majority aren't even christian.

4.Prove your posts have merit by taking Kent Hovind up on his offer.
He is my brother in Christ and I do depend on him to do what is right.

Nice fallback you have there. I have explained Hovind's demands are unattainable, as he expects people to prove that evolution is the only way that species could have arisen, meaning that the competitor would have to prove there is no other way. You cannot prove such a thing, and so the demands are tilted.

The burden of proof is on you; prove your assertions.

5. You're an atheist, which places you at a disadvantage to begin with, as the Sacred Text says you are a fool.

And I say you're a fool. I couldn't give a toss what your 'sacred' texts say. There are plenty of sacred texts in the world, and yours happens to contradict common scientific knowledge in a great many places.
Faling back on scripture does not bolster your claims.

6. I considered that when I started posting to you.

If you considered and dismissed my arguments and my listed examples, why do you find it so hard to write down the details of what is wrong with them?

7. Order and disorder are understandable even to a child.

And yet you find yourself unable to define an absolute order and disorder as you had set out to do.

The Bible tells me you will continue to insist you're correct. I never say I'm correct, but God IS correct and perfect and He says you are wrong.

Wonderful. Back up your assertion.

The Bible refutes you, Victohadin whether you see it or not.

Wonderful. Back up it's correctness.

Kent Hovind doesn't ask you to recreate the universe, but he asks for a simple proof of evolution happening right now and you have failed to provide any proof of any of your claims because you're unable to prove what is false.

Again you ignore my listed examples. Your argument is circular; 'it is wrong because you cannot prove it because it is wrong'.

Your ridiculous "old hat" argument about "pink unicorn" under your bed was refuted when I said......"If your pink unicorn inspired millions to build cathedrals and churches to worship him in, and if countless books were written about your pink unicorn's life, and movies were made to tell of your pink unicorn's life, and if lives were changed and miracles performed by believing in your pink unicorn, if all history was dated from the birth of your pink unicorn and if movies, videos, dvd's, cd's cassettes, records, were produced with songs about your pink unicorn, if a whole month was set aside by the greatest nation on the planet to celebrate the birthday of your pink unicorn, if your pink unicorn's name was engraved on books, clothes, etc., if the greatest selling book on planet earth was about your pink unicorn, if numberless beautiful songs were written about your pink unicorn, then YES, any sane thinking person would seruiously look into your pink unicorn's claims!

And I answered that. -Truth is not defined by popularity or how well-known it is. Is the Islamic faith 60% as true as Christianity?

The fact is that you clearly misunderstood my pink unicorn. My pink unicorn is an untestable concept, just like your god.

As such, I can stand and shout "YOU CANNOT DISPROVE THE UNICORN!!" all day without fear that it can be summarily disproved, as it is untestable; just like your god.

This doesn't make it true, however, for the burden of proof would rest on my shoulders to back-up it's existence. The same applies for your god. You cannot simply say "GOD EXISTS!" and feel smug because nobody has contradicted your untestable concept; you have to back-up his existence for it to be scientifically viable.

If all the atheists in the world went to Washington D.C. and asked for an audience with the president of the great USA, and his men to prove that there is no God, they would be laughed at, if not locked up immediatley by those in authority. Or if atheists went to Spain, or England, or any country and proclaimed atheism, they would either be laughed at, locked up, but never taken seriously. Russia tried atheism and failed miserably, even Gorbachev said that atheism was destroying his country.

Wake up, Victohadin, your beliefs are not even a footnote in the progress of humanity and it's claims. Atheism is a joke, a stain on any society and the only reason atheists exist is because God allows it.

And yet the West is becoming less and less zealous in it's religious foundation. Hardly anyone in britain or Europe bothers going to church anymore; it is seen as the province of lonely old women.
Only a tiny minority in Europe believe in biblical creationism. A majority believe in evolution by natural selection.
This coincides with improved scientific literacy over here, and religious zeal continues to fall.

The only reason religion remains prevalent is because it is a wonderful psychological crutch. Highly addictive, at that.

I posted here not because I thought or believed you had anything of merit to offer, but to plant a seed from God in your mind because somewhere down the line, God will remind you of some things I told you, of some things other christians told you and you will be without excuse.

You believe your unbacked assertions, ignorance of my stated evidence and insistences that I am a fool will 'plant a seed in my mind'? You are more bonkers than I thought.

I will believe in god the day that sufficient evidence backs his existence. Until then I will not.

For you see the burden of proof in this discussion rests on your shoulders. You wish to prove creationism, but to do that you must come up with backing evidence, empirical data and a sound scientific model; not by ranting, raving and insisting the other point of view is wrong.

Nice try, but you still have a lot of work to do.






Bryan; you said it yourself:

All it says is prove that macro-evolution is a provable fact, rather than just a theory. You need empirical evidence that it's the only way it could have happened.

[/quote:bb3f8]

You can't prove it is the 'only' way. It is a logical impossibility.

 

[Bryan]

You can't prove it is the 'only' way. It is a logical impossibility.

Thank you. Now admit you've lost this debate, and move on.

 

[victorhadin]

You can't prove it is the 'only' way. It is a logical impossibility.

Thank you. Now admit you've lost this debate, and move on.

Excuse me?

Are you stating that since an untestable concept cannot, by it's nature, be disproven, it is automatically true?

Sorry, bub. Between me, the scientific community and my invisible pink unicorn I think not.



Now back up creationism or admit that it has no scientific merit. I have been waiting the entire length of this thread for you to do one or the other.

 

[Rebecka]

creation and common sense

Ten million soldiers are marching in perfect order, except for one who is out of step.

Atheism wants me to believe that numbers mean nothing, that the soldier out of step is correct and all the other millions in step are wrong.

I think not. Let one ant crawl on you, you can handle it, but let ten million crawl on you, will you shout, "Numbers mean nothing here!".

Atheism wants me to prove what is obvious and understood by sane, thinking, intelligent people who govern this planet that there is a God.


Atheism wants me to believe that God needs me or anyone to prove Himself to them when God said Himself that atheists are stupid since Webster's defines a "fool" as a very stupid person.

I didn't say it, I'm just repeating what God said.

Atheism wants me to believe that the reality of sane, thinking, intelligent people who govern the world such as educators, judges, teachers, professors, musicians, presidents, kings, princes, ministers, senators, congressmen, councilmen, policemen, managers, typists, secretaries, accountants, artists, songwriters, movie directors, writers, archaeologists, scholars, theologians, preachers, jailers, wardens, storeowners, principals, journalists, sculptors, painters, contractors, blue collar workers, white collar workers, editors, manufacturers, inventors, bodymen, supreme court judges, superior court judges, municpal court judges, ballplayers, boxers, wrestlers, singers, factory workers, steelworkers,. etc. and every other normal sane intelligent person who lives on planet earth are wrong, and that atheists are right in denying the very God who made them;

But these sane, thinking, intelligent world governing majority;


UNDERSTAND there is a God.

REALITY IS OBVIOUS.

Atheism has never been able to rule in any capacity, it is powerless to make a nation and govern under it's beliefs, it has never been able to overthrow what is in power, which is the reality of sane, intelligent people ruling the world in the belief that God is real and is present in his universe, who also made his universe.

Atheism says; Prove there is a God! And it is the same old hat satan tried to get Jesus, to wear

"If you are the Son of God, turn these stones to bread."

Jesus told him, "Get thee behind me satan, for it is written, you shall not tempt the Lord your God." (New Testament)

 

[saved4life]

Atheism wants me to believe that numbers mean nothing, that the soldier out of step is correct and all the other millions in step are wrong.

I think not. Let one ant crawl on you, you can handle it, but let ten million crawl on you, will you shout, "Numbers mean nothing here!".

This has to be the lamest argument I've heard in my entire life.

Majority-rule decides the truth.

Do you know the average Christian hasn't even read the Bible in its entirety? They base their life on it because everybody else in their family did. It's "religion by default."

The average person is a sheep. The church relies on that.

 

[victorhadin]

1) See saved4life's comment, and consider once again; if it is a numbers game, is Islam 60% as true as Christianity? Is Hinduism 50% as true?
Of course not.
2) 'Atheism is powerless to make a nation'. -Well Christianity isn't too smart at it either though, is it? Fundamentalist or totalitarian governments from whichever direction are a poor idea. A secular government, on theother hand, is far more even-handed, as it governs (at least in theory) with no preference for any belief system.
3) 'Understand there is a god. Reality is obvious'? -If it is so obvious, by all means back up creationism in a scientific context. God may be an untestable concept, but literal biblical creationism is far more specific and easy to tackle.

Atheism says; Prove there is a God! And it is the same old hat satan tried to get Jesus, to wear

"If you are the Son of God, turn these stones to bread."

So are you going to attempt to back up creationism/ the concept of god or not? If not, just say so, and the argument ends here. Blind faith makes for a poor debate.

 

[saved4life]

'Understand there is a god. Reality is obvious'?

And once again, it's not a matter of whether or not there is a God.

It's a matter of whether the Bible is true.

Those are two totally different, independent things!

There can be a God and the Bible can be totally false and made as a characterization of a God that has never spoken to anybody or let his nature or temperment be known.

 

[victorhadin]

True enough; it is best to distinguish between the two. The existence of a vague deity is an untestable concept that one can make polite philosophical discussion about. The truth of biblical accounts is not an untestable concept and is scientifically absurd in many areas (genesis and the flood probably offending the most).

 

[Rebecka]

Victohadin says...........Blind faith makes for a poor debate.


Atheism is what requires blind faith and the faith it requires is in self. Atheism is a self serving, self deceiving religion based on what nots acquired in darkness. I know what I believe in. I know God is real and He is light.

Christianity is the dominating power in the world, whether it is perfect or not.

God and I do not have to prove anything to atheists, it is atheism that have not proven anything to or in the world, and that is why they are not taken seriously in a world where people who believe in God rule and govern.

You may call whatever a lame argument, but the fact remains that common sense tells you the soldier out of step needs to get in step.


Atheism's argument is a triple, double neck, twisted, reverse swan dive with "prove it!" because they don't see or understand.

IT IS UNDERSTOOD BY SANE, INTELLIGENT PEOPLE THERE IS A GOD.

The Bible doesn't prove God, it understands and knows he is real.

 

[saved4life]

IT IS UNDERSTOOD BY SANE, INTELLIGENT PEOPLE THERE IS A GOD.

I guess Albert Einstein wasn't sane or intelligent.

:

 

[saved4life]

You may call whatever a lame argument, but the fact remains that common sense tells you the soldier out of step needs to get in step.

Better get in step, Victor, and get back into the march.

Er, I mean better return to the flock of sheep. Your thinking has put you in grave danger of Christian's kind and merciful God.

 

[victorhadin]

Victohadin says...........Blind faith makes for a poor debate.


Atheism is what requires blind faith and the faith it requires is in self. Atheism is a self serving, self deceiving religion based on what nots acquired in darkness. I know what I believe in. I know God is real and He is light.

I went over this, by dictionary definition.

An atheist is simply one who does not believe in a deity. He can 'not believe' for a variety of reasons; because he actvely believes no deity is possible or the idea is simply not taken seriously for whatever reason. It is not a religion and doesn't fit any of the parameters required to be one.

No blind faith required, I'm afraid.

Christianity is the dominating power in the world, whether it is perfect or not.

I would say that Western money and military power is the dominant influence myself. I can't remember the last time christian churches changed the shape of world events.

God and I do not have to prove anything to atheists, it is atheism that have not proven anything to or in the world, and that is why they are not taken seriously in a world where people who believe in God rule and govern.

You may call whatever a lame argument, but the fact remains that common sense tells you the soldier out of step needs to get in step.

I am sorely tempted to draw the analogy of the cynic in NAZI Germany or the dissenter in Soviet Russia.

"Get in line, soldier!"

Atheism's argument is a triple, double neck, twisted, reverse swan dive with "prove it!" because they don't see or understand.

IT IS UNDERSTOOD BY SANE, INTELLIGENT PEOPLE THERE IS A GOD.

The Bible doesn't prove God, it understands and knows he is real.



[/b]

So; my question again:


Are you at all interested in backing your ideas and assertions with evidence or scientific reasoning, or do you want to have a good monologue? If you just want to preach, tell us.

 

[Rebecka]

The BIBLE

Savedforlife says......It's a matter of whether the Bible is true.
Of course, the Bible is true.
If you knew any history at all, you would understand what is going on in the world.

There are only so many thoughts available for you to think.
There is only so far back you can go in recorded history.
The Sumerians gave us writing about 5000 B.C or so.
Because of archaeology we can learn of the ancient world and we do.
There is no religion but what Moses brought down from Mt Sinai.


Guatama Buddah, and all the other gurus thought of nothing new, but that it was found to be first in the Bible.
Every thought you could possibly think is found first within the pages of the Bible.

Every book in existence has it's origins in the Bible.

There are no ideas or thoughts or ways known to man that is recorded anywhere that was not FIRST in the Bible.

What God told Moses and all the Hebrew prophets is recorded in the Bible and NO literature in the world contains anything but what is found in the Bible FIRST.

Even the Nuzu laws and all the ancient ways and beliefs of ancient people is found in the Bible.

 

[victorhadin]

[Devil's advocate.] What of aboriginal beliefs?[/Devil's advocate.] :wink:

 

[saved4life]

Every book in existence has it's origins in the Bible.

Are you out of your mind?

Seriously. Do you have access to the internet in some mental ward lobby?


The Bible borrowing heavily from religions BEFORE it is not proof that the Bible is true. It is proof that it is not divine.

For example, the ancients greeks had a concept of Hades long before Christianity came and took it.

 

[Rebecka]

Savedforlife says.........The Bible borrowing heavily from religions BEFORE it is not proof that the Bible is true. It is proof that it is not divine.

For example, the ancients greeks had a concept of Hades long before Christianity came and took it.

You really don't know history do you? I can tell you know nothing about the history of the world at all. My job requires that I study ancient history and archaeology and the Bible, so I know of what I speak, there are only so many books in the world to read and learn from and I know pretty much what is out there. You don't know anything I don't know, savedforlife. The Old Testament told of Hades, even before that, long before the Greeks ever came along.

The Bible borrows from no one and it is divine and there is no book like it ever. You shall not kill and you shall not steal and all the rest of the commandments of God was a Hebrew revelation, not Greek.

The Greeks were used of God for something else to contribute to the world.

Recorded history goes back to the Sumerians who gave us writing.
The only thing found by archaeology at that time was in Ugarit and it was the ancient myth, which was a belief in deities of chaos and order, which I told Victor many posts ago.

That is the VERY FIRST record we have of deities and how they were believed in and dealt with. From all this came the greek gods, Zeus, Eros, and all the million more, all having to do with sex and sex and sex as the Greeks were promiscuous and unnatural, though thinkers. The ancient Hebrews were the people God revealed himself to when he called Abram out of Ur of the Chaldees many thousands of years ago and told him who he was and what he had in mind for what he created to a degree was this revealed to Abram.

Your Greek thing is far in the future compared to the ancient myth of the fertiltiy gods and of man's fear of the strange things he did not understand. After this came the Code of Hammurabi, (not sure how to spell that) and Victor mentions the aborigine, which is easy to see we live in a strange and complex world where all men are created in the image of God, which explains the seeming evolution of man, but in reality, it is God revealing Himself to us as we can bear it, it is a project of blending clay with infintiy.

Man's nature directs him to worship something. The ancients worshipped the gods of chaos and order, offering the god of order gifts to secure favors and it goes on and on, the aborigines living by their instincts know there is something beyond their control, it is God.

 

[saved4life]

You really don't know history do you? The Old Testament told of Hades, even before that, long before the Greeks ever came along.

LMAO. :

Sumeria is given credit for being the first complex society.

It is not the birthplace of the first oral communication nor the first written communication. Egypt had earlier written communication. Hell, cave men even had symbolic language.

Just because the OT talks about Adam doesn't mean it was written then! :

 

[Rebecka]

It is not the birthplace of the first oral communication nor the first written communication.
Yes, it is. I refuse to argue with someone who knows nothing about ancient history, but is guessing and I have to go to work now, so rant on.

Cavemen? Yeah right!!!!!!!! RECORDED history goes back to the Sumerians and if you don't know that, I can't help it.

Look up the word "recorded"