• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Atheist Delusion

Windwalker

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha said:
We're not talking about organisms, we're talking about cats, dogs, monkeys, humans . . .
Click to expand...
A cat, dog, monkey, or human, is an organism:

or·gan·ism
ˈôrɡəˌnizəm/
noun
  1. an individual animal, plant, or single-celled life form.
    synonyms: living thing, being, creature, animal, plant, life form
    "fish and other organisms"
And with a lack of knowledge on this level, you expect us to take your word evolution is incorrect? For 20 years you've been arguing against evolution and you don't even understand something as basic as this? Did you attempt to actually learn about this stuff, or just parrot the arguments of the ignorant, the blind leading the blind into a 20 year old ditch? Such a fear of knowledge is the antithesis of faith.
 
Last edited:
Windwalker

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
WalterTrull said:
Did ya ever think of God as an organism? There certainly are parallels. Haven't quite gotten that image in focus yet.
Click to expand...
Most people think of God as an "entity", which in fact does have its parallels with an "organism". It's like an anthropomorphism, but really it's simply just a reflection of dualism, which sees separation between the subject and the object. God is seen an object, something outside one's own self. That dualistic conception of God is directly reflected in atheist thought about God as well. It's the same dualistic, external, "entity" that the theist sees.
 
Earthling

Earthling

David Henson
Windwalker said:
A cat, dog, monkey, or human, is an organism:

or·gan·ism
ˈôrɡəˌnizəm/
noun
  1. an individual animal, plant, or single-celled life form.
    synonyms: living thing, being, creature, animal, plant, life form
    "fish and other organisms"
And with a lack of knowledge on this level, you expect us to take your word evolution is incorrect? For 20 years you've been arguing against evolution and you don't even understand something as basic as this? Did you attempt to actually learn about this stuff, or just parrot the arguments of the ignorant, the blind leading the blind into a 20 year old ditch? Such a fear of knowledge is the antithesis of faith.
Click to expand...

If, uh . . . if an organism is a cat, dog, monkey, then an organism can't evolve into itself, can it. That would be like saying an animal, or a mammal, or a species, etc.

I was specifically asking about dogs, cats, monkeys.
 
Polymath257

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha said:
If, uh . . . if an organism is a cat, dog, monkey, then an organism can't evolve into itself, can it. That would be like saying an animal, or a mammal, or a species, etc.

I was specifically asking about dogs, cats, monkeys.
Click to expand...

Individuals don't evolve. Populations do.

If you are asking specifically about dogs, cats, and monkeys, then any questions about the development of lungs, hearts, and circulatory systems are irrelevant, because all of those were established in the earliest vertebrates (which were long before the ones on your list, which are all mammals). This shows your questions, as asked, to be nonsensical.
 
Last edited:
jonathan180iq

jonathan180iq

Well-Known Member
Nowhere Man said:
Of course. I follow a lot of Ray comfort and Thunderfoot material.

Unlike Thunderfoot, Rays arguments are always superficial, argues from incredulity, appeals to emotion, likes using colorful graphics, and orchestration music to set the mood, is a poor researcher with no foundation to base his arguments upon outside the rose colored universe he lives in.
Click to expand...
Have you seen the one where Ray finally realizes what speciation is and sits there dumbfounded for a minunte and a half? It's beautiful.
 
jonathan180iq

jonathan180iq

Well-Known Member
RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha said:
The interviewer explains that the evidence is given to us. We know it. Atheists deny what they know for their own desires. Accountability.
Click to expand...

Would his reasoning and logic be just as valid and convincing to you if it were coming from a person of completely different faith?

"Why don't you accept Gaea as the creator of the Heavens and of all life on Earth? The evidence is clear. Christians know it to be true, but avoid accepting it out of their own desires... Accountability..."
 
Windwalker

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha said:
If, uh . . . if an organism is a cat, dog, monkey, then an organism can't evolve into itself, can it.
Click to expand...
What? You don't understand evolution, apparently. And yet, you think it's wrong, despite your ignorance on the subject? How exactly does that work?

RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha said:
I was specifically asking about dogs, cats, monkeys.
Click to expand...
You were asking about circulatory systems without a heart. You were told there are plenty of organisms where this is the case, and how that more complex circulatory systems evolved from the less complex ones. You then denied that dogs, cats, and humans were organisms, thus betraying your ignorance about Evolution, or basic biology even, which you, for some incomprehensible reason, imagine is false? Very strange. I can't imagine with such misguided and uniformed ideas about basic information like this, your theology stands any better chance of being valid on any level.

Test question: Does the Theory of Evolution teach that humans evolved from monkeys? Yes, or no?
 
viole

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha said:
From the time I posted the video to the time you responded leaves you very little time to have watched much of it. The interviewer explains that the evidence is given to us. We know it. Atheists deny what they know for their own desires. Accountability.
Click to expand...

Evidence of what? ID? First we have to check that it is not SD, instead. Which is not so obvious.

Ciao

- viole
 
viole

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha said:
And this has always struck me as odd. When I see someone talking about evolution, like a teacher, for example, to me it is obvious that they are repeating something they were told that someone made up. It's always changing and so never really true, fact, accurate . . . so why couldn't an intelligent design scientist do the same? Because they would be fired immediately, is one possible answer, but that shouldn't deter them.
Click to expand...

Yes, I knew a teacher that got expelled from medicine school because he wanted to teach the controversy surrounding embryology vs. the stork theory of human fetal development. Now nobody dares to say that kids are in reality delivered by storks. Very sad.

Ciao

- viole
 
SkepticThinker

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha said:
Not exactly. The creator Jehovah God existed without beginning. Outside of time, which naturally only came about through the creation of the universe. And yes, this is a difficult thing to wrap one's mind around, but what are the alternatives. Eventually you end up with something coming from nothing randomly, or accidentally.



If the Bible claims to be the uninspired translation of the inspired word of the creator a claim has been made. I hear tell atheists in these parts investigate claims. I don't believe they've done a very good job with the Bible.



Define worshiping? What does it mean? Who does it benefit?
Click to expand...
Hmmm, sounds made up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top