- This topic is empty.
- Posts
The score then stands at Reality 2 – Biblical literalists 0.
Next question:
What evidence is there that homosexuality is especially damaging?
Stuart
Quote This thread is entitled “The Too Hard Basket, What biblical literalists can't explain”. It is not called “what biologists know”. Can you explain how the Kiwi got from Mt. Ararat to Auckland or not? stu, I thought you would actually enjoy injecting some science into this. But if there is no science to be injected, then what are you blabbering on about?
If you feel it's too much work for you to explain it scientifically, why should anyone else try? You should not demand more than you are willing to give yourself.
Quote Not interested in 'proof of evolution of the species' (whatever on earth that is). Just want to know how biblical literalists explain the fossil record that shows changes in morphology of species over very long periods of time. The actual changes that happened would be explained much as you would explain them.
God created us and animals with the ability to adapt. Whereas you would say nature did it.
But the imaginary links between species for which there isn't any actual evidence for….
I might as well ask you what you would consider to be a false question as well:Stu, why don't you explain to us: If Jesus wasn't the Messiah, how do you explain all the miracles he did?
Of course, to you, he did no miracles, there is something very biased and wrong in the question itself, as there is in your question.david.
Quote Can you explain how the Kiwi got from Mt. Ararat to Auckland or not? Stu, as of yet, there are a lot of things scientists cannot explain. That doesn't mean they're wrong or stupid. It simply means they don't have enough information yet.
While I can suggest several things, and can point out the assumptions that lead to what at first appears to be a conflict with the Bible, I cannot explain what I do not know. I can only provide possibilities.It seems very strange to me that you're not willing to attempt to support or explain how the scientists arrived at the dates they did.
david
Quote (Stu @ April 14 2008,21:23) The score then stands at Reality 2 – Biblical literalists 0. Next question:
What evidence is there that homosexuality is especially damaging?
Stuart
Stu,I have read that the rectum was not made to sustain the pressure and friction of sex. Along with that, there are “unclean” issues surrounding feces and infection. Also the rectum does not produce a natural body-signal lubrication for sex. Rectum's have been known to tear due to this lack of lubrication, also the wall of the rectum is thinner than that of the vagina. Besides that, I can't think of what would be damaging to the body.
I have also read that for some it is damaging to their mind, but these cases vary with respect to social and religious ideas.
Quote (Stu @ April 09 2008,18:58) There was mention of the Too Hard Basket in another thread. There are many very good questions that have been asked in these fora for which no one has produced a good answer. Science has a Very Hard Basket and a We Think It Could Be Impossible Basket but no 'Too Hard Basket'. First item:
How did the Kiwi get from Mt. Ararat to Auckland after the supposed flood?
Stuart
So, you tell us how the Kiwi got there.Quote (942767 @ April 14 2008,21:02) Quote (Stu @ April 09 2008,18:58) There was mention of the Too Hard Basket in another thread. There are many very good questions that have been asked in these fora for which no one has produced a good answer. Science has a Very Hard Basket and a We Think It Could Be Impossible Basket but no 'Too Hard Basket'. First item:
How did the Kiwi get from Mt. Ararat to Auckland after the supposed flood?
Stuart
So, you tell us how the Kiwi got there.
Evolution. Not a global flood as depicted in the OT.Quote (kejonn @ April 15 2008,14:38) Quote (942767 @ April 14 2008,21:02) Quote (Stu @ April 09 2008,18:58) There was mention of the Too Hard Basket in another thread. There are many very good questions that have been asked in these fora for which no one has produced a good answer. Science has a Very Hard Basket and a We Think It Could Be Impossible Basket but no 'Too Hard Basket'. First item:
How did the Kiwi get from Mt. Ararat to Auckland after the supposed flood?
Stuart
So, you tell us how the Kiwi got there.
Evolution. Not a global flood as depicted in the OT.
How, through evolution. Please explain. Like what came first the chicken or the egg?Quote (942767 @ April 14 2008,21:43) Quote (kejonn @ April 15 2008,14:38) Quote (942767 @ April 14 2008,21:02) Quote (Stu @ April 09 2008,18:58) There was mention of the Too Hard Basket in another thread. There are many very good questions that have been asked in these fora for which no one has produced a good answer. Science has a Very Hard Basket and a We Think It Could Be Impossible Basket but no 'Too Hard Basket'. First item:
How did the Kiwi get from Mt. Ararat to Auckland after the supposed flood?
Stuart
So, you tell us how the Kiwi got there.
Evolution. Not a global flood as depicted in the OT.
How, through evolution. Please explain. Like what came first the chicken or the egg?
Who cares. It is irrelevant to this discussion.Hi,
So the ants had a meeting.
They convened a court to judge the being who stood on them.
Sadly the meeting was held in the middle of a busy roadway so no conclusions could be reached.Quote (TimothyVI @ April 15 2008,10:43) Boy, that was more information than I needed. Tim
Sorry guys! It's my medical background, it comes out sometimes and grosses people out. Ha!
Quote (kejonn @ April 15 2008,15:17) Quote (942767 @ April 14 2008,21:43) Quote (kejonn @ April 15 2008,14:38) Quote (942767 @ April 14 2008,21:02) Quote (Stu @ April 09 2008,18:58) There was mention of the Too Hard Basket in another thread. There are many very good questions that have been asked in these fora for which no one has produced a good answer. Science has a Very Hard Basket and a We Think It Could Be Impossible Basket but no 'Too Hard Basket'. First item:
How did the Kiwi get from Mt. Ararat to Auckland after the supposed flood?
Stuart
So, you tell us how the Kiwi got there.
Evolution. Not a global flood as depicted in the OT.
How, through evolution. Please explain. Like what came first the chicken or the egg?
Who cares. It is irrelevant to this discussion.
To hard for you to answer?No , …I just think it was to hard to put humpty dumpty back together again, using lyrics,
well to make Adam and eve one that is,
we fail big time,
and for that reason God did not strive with men, both symbolic and real floods, flooded the earth, for failer,
for men were all pairing off without fear of yoking themselves with woman in which were made clear they were not given to them?
So They created giants? symbolic and real. pehaps as wellOh Then they became priest and forbid by law to correct the prob
Quote (charity @ April 15 2008,16:22) No I just think it was to hard to put humpty dumpty back together again, using lyrics,
well to make Adam and eve one that is,
we fail big time,
and for that reason God did not strive with men, both symbolic and real floods, flooded the earth, for failer,
for men were all pairing off without fear of yoking what was not given to them?Oh Then they became priest and forbid by law to correct the prob
Not too hard to answer? Then please answer for us then.You know, perhaps you need to debate yourself, and that way you can’t lose 94
win the battle, but the wars still contuues
It has magnificent outcomes as you search the ins and outs of your own thoughts.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
