- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 07 2012,19:05) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 08 2012,06:03) Well, I've just given you some evidence to the contrary. It is called “mathematical odds”. What are the odds that life not only derived itself from nothing, but “thought” ahead to give itself a way to reproduce? The odds AGAINST this nonsense are astronomical.
How about the odds against a being much greater than mankind creating us? Even odds?
YOU have no idea what the odds are, especially since you don't even know what the explanation is.
Then let me know when YOU have an explanation to explain YOUR theory, okay? Until then…………..shhhhh.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 08 2012,08:20) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 07 2012,14:34) To answer your question, if I had a rational reason to quarantine my child, then I would, but I would not purposely kill my own child under any circumstances.
And therein lies our difference, WIT. You don't consider a direct command from the One who created and owns every single person in existence to be a rational reason to perform an action, while I can't think of a more rational reason than that.
Ironically Mike you just went against your own logic being that God owns EVERY single in existence how can any sacrifice of anything be of benefit to him in anyway HE owns it all anyway as HE says here:Psalm 50:7-23
New International Version (NIV)
7 “Listen, my people, and I will speak;
I will testify against you, Israel:
I am God, your God.
8 I bring no charges against you concerning your sacrifices
or concerning your burnt offerings, which are ever before me.
9 I have no need of a bull from your stall
or of goats from your pens,
10 for every animal of the forest is mine,
and the cattle on a thousand hills.
11 I know every bird in the mountains,
and the insects in the fields are mine.
12 If I were hungry I would not tell you,
for the world is mine, and all that is in it.
13 Do I eat the flesh of bulls
or drink the blood of goats?14 “Sacrifice thank offerings to God,
fulfill your vows to the Most High,
15 and call on me in the day of trouble;
I will deliver you, and you will honor me.”16 But to the wicked person, God says:
“What right have you to recite my laws
or take my covenant on your lips?
17 You hate my instruction
and cast my words behind you.
18 When you see a thief, you join with him;
you throw in your lot with adulterers.
19 You use your mouth for evil
and harness your tongue to deceit.
20 You sit and testify against your brother
and slander your own mother’s son.
21 When you did these things and I kept silent,
you thought I was exactly[a] like you.
But I now arraign you
and set my accusations before you.22 “Consider this, you who forget God,
or I will tear you to pieces, with no one to rescue you:
23 Those who sacrifice thank offerings honor me,
and to the blameless I will show my salvation.”Yet you actually refuse to believe that Jesus was delivered even though he was blameless. You keep thinking that God would do such a thing although he says such a thing would never even enter his mind:
Jeremiah 7:31
They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind.So do you believe that the sacrifice of a child only enters God mind when it concerns His own? Please this is of the utmost importance, do you believe that God NEEDS anything?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 26 2011,02:40) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 24 2011,19:29) Computers are designed, human brains aren’t. This is not a point of interesting discussion, it is just incorrect to say that brains are designed, they are the product of natural selection. If you can prove it’s wrong, then go for it. But if all you have is an inability to believe it, or a prior commitment to a conspiracy theory of Celestial Friends, then I don’t think you have anything interesting to say.
And this is why discoursing with you gets boring, Stu. I say God CREATED man and his brain exactly the way He wanted it to be. You assert that brains aren't designed. Then you tell me to prove you wrong, yet cry when I try to have you prove a negative.
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 24 2011,19:29) Quote (mikeboll64]Isn't a block of wood an inanimate object @ similar to the inanimate objects you think animated themselves and created their own intelligence?<!–QuoteEnd) “What scientific theory claims that blocks of wood will come to life of their own accord??[/i] If so, how is it an answer?
Here's another example of you hiding from the question.Stu, do YOU PERSONALLY believe that an unintelligent, inanimate block of wood can bring life and intelligence into itself? YES or NO?
If not, then why are you SOOOOOO certain that other unintelligent, inanimate things brought life and intelligence into themselves?
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 24 2011,19:29) mikeboll,64 wrote:Scripture says that God can raise a living human being up from a rock. Sort of like your “life just happened from inanimate elements” theory, huh?
No, making something by design is very different to the non-design that is natural selection.
And yet another! It is okay in your mind that NOTHING caused life from inanimate objects, but strange that a being much more intelligent than us could do it.Quote (Stu @ Dec. 24 2011,19:29) unless you believe in Preadamites
I do. You can read all about it in my thread “Was Adam truly the first man ever?”But this is senseless to me, Stu. I've read your NON-answer about the apes and the pointing. You are an EXPERT in diversionary tactics. Where is my genuine answer to the question? Nowhere.
And you never even responded to why the FIRST fish walked out of the ocean into a paradise already filled with trees and insects.
Get back to me when you are able to actually defend the asinine claims made by your “Life just happened from nothing for no apparent reason” buddies.
Brains arose by natural selection working in a non-random way on mutations that arose randomly. That is an established fact, and the only objection you have raised is your own personal incredulity, which I think derives from your ignorance of the matter which you have cultivated to serve the prejudice you hold for religious fantasy stories, as evidenced by your claim that something you call a god did something you call “create”, not that you have explained anything by that claim.As for proving a negative, perhaps you could address the example of that I gave you as a way of demonstrating some ability to comprehend the relevant philosophy.
Since you appear singularly unable to invest the effort in researching the concept of fish moving over land for yourself, I'll give you a hint: there is an survival advantage for a fish that can escape a drying pond by travelling a short distance over land, and there are amphibians that show this same behaviour today. See how that constitutes an actual explanation, while assertions of gods doing things because it pleased them is woo for those satisfied with not knowing?
Abiogenesis is a very interesting topic, and there is much ingenious and plausible speculation on it. But you were dishonestly suggesting that I should believe that wood could be reanimated, and I am calling you on that strawman. It appears not to be me running from the question. Do you remain serious that it would be inconsistent for me not to take the reanimation of wood seriously? There certainly are mechanisms involving cloning techniques that could work, but I don't think that is what you meant. So perhaps you can either explain yourself, or else retract and try something that is not an insult to any reader's intelligence.
Stuart
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 27 2011,00:54) Princess, please refrain from speaking to me unless you have something substantial to add to the discussion, okay?
Perhaps she should get back to the kitchen while she is at it. And not worry her pretty little head.And there was I wondering when you would make a worthwhile contribution.
When will you?
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Dec. 29 2011,08:25) Evolution is a faith that assumes more fantastic things than any other faith sytem. Evolutionists or those that believe that doctrine make statements like the ones with smarter brains survived…
Do they realise the technology that goes into a smarter brain or even a simple one.
We who have the advantage of intelligence (possessing one of these intelligent brains) can only stand in awe at what something with the supposed IQ of zero (about the same as a pair of boots) came up with. Not only that, but all the brains, and everything else in the universe to boot.
It is such an obvious and simple fact that the universe is evidence of intelligence beyond anything we can imagine as well as something eternal that indeed the scripture that says that those who refused to love the truth are given over to the spirit of error and delusion is absolutely right on.
Evolutionists are also deluded into thinking that those that do not believe it do not understand it. Often it is the very opposite because it is by understanding that theory that leads a non-biased and non-brainwashed mind to see that the whole theory sits on a faith and belief system that is impossible. They assume that everything came from nothing or something non-living an eternal because that is the only 2 other options. Anyone who checks those 2 possible Atheistic explanations to everything will soon see that they are impossible even if they dedicate 1 hour of thought to it.
However, even when they have this evidence, they are still compelled to believe the impossible delusion over logic.
2 Thessalonians 2:10-12
10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.
If the fact of evolution and the theory of natural selection that expains it were simple or obvious, then it would not have taken until 1859 for its publication.Sometimes common sense is not enough. The assertion of ignorant superstitions of celestial conspiracy theories never is.
Stuart
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 05 2012,11:46) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 03 2012,22:12) 'Evolution' is not a force. It's not a sentient being. It's a theoretical description of biological history. It does not 'make' us do anything. It does not have a purpose or a plan. It is not the same thing as 'God'.
And each mutation is thought to take thousands, maybe even millions of years?I wonder about Darwin's Galapagos finches, and how this one “evolved” a beak for cracking seeds, and that one “evolved” a beak for dipping into a certain kind of flower.
And you say these things just happened by “chance”? Hmmmmm…………..
How many useless beaks did evolution evolve on these birds before “deciding” on the perfect beak for each food source of each bird? There must be an infinite number of evolved beaks that just didn't quite cut it, right? And with thousands, maybe millions of years of evolution wasted on each useless beak, it must have taken TRILLIONS of years for those finches to evolve the beak that was just right for them, huh? All while the flowers were also evolving into different shapes and sizes. Wow, what a coincidence that the right beak evolved at the same time as the right flower!
Your theory has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.
The populations of Darwin's finches on each island had natural variation in all traits. Those with beaks slightly better suited to the particular food sources available on the island were the ones with a slight adaptive advantage, and over time those particular kinds of beak came to be common because it was those particular finches that reproduced more often.You seem to have this wrong idea that natural selection is random. It isn't.
Stuart
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 08 2012,07:38) Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 06 2012,20:09) Hi WIT, I'm simply asked which crime is worse, murder or slavery?
Keep in mind: we can always rescue someone from slavery.
Would genocide not be mass-murder, compared to one baby?God bless
Ed J
You are missing the point. I am not saying that bad things aren't happening in our time, I am simply saying that things have improved over time.Case in point: abortions were taking place during the times of slavery as well, so it's not an either/or trade.
Hi WIT,I would say with the advent of powerful nuclear bombs that are capable
of mutual assured distraction war has indeed diminished in the civilized world.
But muslim countries that still practice slavery would not hesitate to use the bomb.So it depends where you live in the world!
God bless
Ed JQuote (TimothyVI @ Jan. 08 2012,22:44) ^^ Yep, nuclear bombs certainly are capable of DESTRACTION. Tim
Hi Tim,Oops, I meant destruction.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 07 2012,20:53) Ironically Mike you just went against your own logic being that God owns EVERY single in existence how can any sacrifice of anything be of benefit to him in anyway HE owns it all anyway……..
And that's why I'm quite convinced that God would never ask me to sacrifice my son. Read my signature, Asana. I clearly know that everything under heaven belongs to Jehovah. That includes me and my son. That's also why I could so easily answer “Absolutely” to WIT's question – because I know the thought would never enter into God's head in the first place.But consider Abraham. How would things have been different if Abraham refused to sacrifice Isaac?
Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 07 2012,20:53) Yet you actually refuse to believe that Jesus was delivered even though he was blameless.
He took our iniquities upon himself. He became sin for us, and therefore was not blameless on the stake, as he carried the sins of the world upon himself at that time.Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 07 2012,20:53) Please this is of the utmost importance, do you believe that God NEEDS anything?
Of course not. In fact, God didn't NEED to allow His human creations to continue on living. But because He so loved us, and knew He could never be righteous in considering any of us righteous, He atoned for our sins through His own Son, thereby blotting out our sins that had piled clear to heaven from His eyes. In that way, He could “forget” our sins and still be able to offer us righteous positions and futures despite the fact none of us are truly righteous or deserving of the things He has in store for us.Jesus had to truly die for our atonement in order for our sins to be justified in God's eyes.
peace,
mikeQuote (Stu @ Jan. 07 2012,23:16) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 27 2011,00:54) Princess, please refrain from speaking to me unless you have something substantial to add to the discussion, okay?
Perhaps she should get back to the kitchen while she is at it. And not worry her pretty little head.And there was I wondering when you would make a worthwhile contribution.
When will you?
Stuart
Those are pretty sexist comments, don't you think? As opposed to my comment, which was based on scientifically proven evidence that hormone fluxuation and subsequent mood swings accompany many women's menstrual cycles.I was calling a spade a spade, which makes YOU the fool for trying to be chivalrous and make ME look a fool. She hasn't been a part of our discussion, and then just popped in out of the blue lambasting me.
I was simply calling it like I saw it. But, I'm sure she'll appreciate your failed attempt at valiance. You are after all, her “Prince Stuart”, are you not? And my contribution has been made; it just seems you simply can't address it. A block of wood is an inanimate object, no? Do you claim that in the right conditions, this block of wood could come back to life, grow roots, and then evolve into a seagull?
Stu, you say things like, “there is an survival advantage for a fish that can escape a drying pond by travelling a short distance over land”, and you don't even realize how pathetic this makes you look.
WHY would this uncaring, unintelligent life force WANT to survive in the first place? WHY would this unintelligent force DECIDE on its own that it would have a better chance of survival by “willing itself” to develop legs?
Nor did you address my first point: WHY, when that “first fish” crawled out of the sea onto land, was there ALREADY supposedly a vast forest of plants and insects waiting for it as a food supply? What “fish” first crawled onto land to BECOME these plants and insects? And how could these latter fish have known to “prepare” its own stomach to digest this new kind of food?
There are a million little questions like this, to which you have no credible answers. And you think by acting all smart and educated, you can make ME look dumb, thereby AVOIDING the actual questions. But you only make yourself out as the fool, Stu.
Here's a new one for you since you've been away:
WHY would this first life form that just happened to live because of the perfect storm of circumstances develop with the ability to reproduce its species?
Do you assert that ONE life not only started as a fluke, but from its very start, it “thought” enough ahead to make sure it “created itself” complete, with the ability to make even more of itself?
Never mind, Stu. Because I already know your answers will be on the lines of this nonsense: “Brains arose by natural selection working in a non-random way on mutations that arose randomly. That is an established fact……”
Pathetic, indeed.
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 08 2012,00:07) Those with beaks slightly better suited to the particular food sources available on the island were the ones with a slight adaptive advantage, and over time those particular kinds of beak came to be common because it was those particular finches that reproduced more often.
My point was:Were there perhaps BILLIONS of different beaks developed, and only 30 of those BILLIONS actually worked for the food source on the island? How many years of mutations were involved to arrive at those 30 beaks that worked? And how were the plants they fertilized able to survive while waiting for the right 30 beaks to mutate into perfection?
Were the seeds alreadly existent, waiting for evolution to say, “Hey, we need to develop one of these beakless birds into a bird with a beak so he can transport us throughout the island, giving us a chance to survive”?
Did the plant with the deep bell-shaped flower evolve at precisely the same time as the finch with the long beak that could transfer its pollen to other like plants? It seems to me that if they didn't evolve at exactly the same time, then both the plant that needs the long beaked bird, and the bird itself would not have made it.
Too many simple little questions, and too few answers.
Quote (TimothyVI @ Jan. 08 2012,05:44) ^^ Yep, nuclear bombs certainly are capable of DESTRACTION. Tim
I have been destracted by them many times.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 08 2012,07:44) What, is YOUR faith “firsthand”? Did you actually SEE with your own eyes life starting from nothing?
I have never claimed that I believed that life started from nothing. Is this your way of admitting that your personal faith is second hand (at best)?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 08 2012,07:50) Then let me know when YOU have an explanation to explain YOUR theory, okay? Until then…………..shhhhh.
Read carefully.It's not my theory. I only believe it to the extent that I understand it and have evidence for it.
As I already said, if you really want to get the answer to your question, ask someone with actual expertise. Don't be pretend to be interested just for the sake of making a point.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 09 2012,11:07) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 08 2012,07:50) Then let me know when YOU have an explanation to explain YOUR theory, okay? Until then…………..shhhhh.
Read carefully.It's not my theory. I only believe it to the extent that I understand it and have evidence for it.
As I already said, if you really want to get the answer to your question, ask someone with actual expertise. Don't be pretend to be interested just for the sake of making a point.
witQuote It's not my theory. I only believe it to the extent that I understand it and have evidence for it. what this could mean is that you can or can not understand it and still believe in it,or are you standing on a saddle between that understanding??
Pierre
Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 08 2012,14:12) Hi WIT, I would say with the advent of powerful nuclear bombs that are capable
of mutual assured distraction war has indeed diminished in the civilized world.
But muslim countries that still practice slavery would not hesitate to use the bomb.So it depends where you live in the world!
God bless
Ed J
And now we come back full circle to my original point.As you have pointed out, where religion abounds, things are worse. You didn't point to a purely secular society as a source of worry about violence and destruction. You specifically narrowed in on a society that remains backward precisely because of their religious dedication. Well done.
Now you just need to have a look in the mirror.
Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 09 2012,01:55) what this could mean is that you can or can not understand it and still believe in it,or are you standing on a saddle between that understanding?? Pierre
Why do you assume that I must “believe in” evolution simply because I am not religious? If evolution were discredited tomorrow, my worldview would be unchanged.All I am saying is that evolution is more in line with all of the evidence I have been exposed to thus far than the bible is – by a long shot!
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 09 2012,07:08) And now we come back full circle to my original point. As you have pointed out, where religion abounds, things are worse. You didn't point to a purely secular society as a source of worry about violence and destruction. You specifically narrowed in on a society that remains backward precisely because of their religious dedication. Well done.
Now you just need to have a look in the mirror.
Hi WIT,Your logic is like saying worship of YHVH (according to WIT)
is equal to worship of antichrist; which of course it is not!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (WhatIsTrue @ Jan. 09 2012,07:14) Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 09 2012,01:55) what this could mean is that you can or can not understand it and still believe in it,or are you standing on a saddle between that understanding?? Pierre
Why do you assume that I must “believe in” evolution simply because I am not religious? If evolution were discredited tomorrow, my worldview would be unchanged.All I am saying is that evolution is more in line with all of the evidence I have been exposed to thus far than the bible is – by a long shot!
Hi WIT,So if evolution was proven wrong tomorrow, why would your belief not change?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
