Evolution My ToE

[YoursTrue]

Luke? Mark? How is that different than saying Bill or Bob wrote them? And what difference does it make who wrote them if it wasn't a deity. Why should anyone take advice from some anonymous Matthew? If I wrote you a Gospel according to It Aint Necessarily So, would you base your life on that?



The I guess Jesus didn't free mankind, did He?



Hitler didn't use the theory of evolution at all. Genocide is not natural selection. It's artificial selection.



That's the liberal message. In America, the Republicans are staunchly preventing such things as relative income equality and environmental concerns including safe workplaces. So, no we cannot stop them. Are you an American that votes Republican?

And evolution is only relevant to biological evolution, not cultural evolution, which is only relevant to biological evolution when it changes gene pools. Does inhaling coal dust affect differential reproductive rates and thus gene pools over generations? If not, the mechanism of evolution cannot affect it.



No, not if the country is America and the war is yet another war of aggression. I am unwilling to spill blood or money, nor that of my descendants, to support the agenda behind any American war since World War II.

I no longer have a meaningful concept of country or patriotism. My eyes are on the local only these days - my community and whatever outside influences affect it for the better or worse. I would fight to defend my community, but not any larger entity such as a country.



Because the Christian god does not exist (I assume that's the one you mean by "God"). It cannot exist as described, because that description is logically impossible. It contains too many pairs of mutually exclusive qualities attributed to the god, such as it being perfect, but still making mistakes, or being omnisicient, but granting free will. You can't have or be both at once just as their can be no married bachelors if bachelor means unmarried man (yeah, somebody actually argued that a married man with a bachelor's degree was a married bachelor).



Yes. That's the problem I identified with you associated with using the word mindless rather than blind, undirected, or dysteleological. You chafed at what I thought was a constructive suggestion, and have been dealing with the problem since, continually having to explain to others what you mean.



I realize that the genesis creation stories were meant to be taken literally. The days of creation have mornings and evenings, and the seventh day was as long as the Sabbath man is commanded to observe in imitation of God resting for one day.

Now that science has demonstrated that the story is incorrect, believers are revising their opinions about what the words mean, varying from fundamentalists who say that the words are to be read and understood literally to the more modern thinkers that accept much or all of the science and have adapted accordingly. But no believer will call the story an error - a wrong guess. They use words like metaphor and allegory to describe a story that is neither. Metaphor or allegory for what? That which really happened? How is that different from error?

So you think all believers must take each day of creation in the Genesis account as a day of 24 hours even if you personally don't believe it?

 

[YoursTrue]

OK! He abided more bad things than just slavery. He also abided and partook in rape. He also committed genocide.

But you say: "That does not mean He is like that."
Of course, it means He is like that! Open your eyes.

So then are all humans guilty (like that) if that is what some do?

 

[YoursTrue]

You quoted Ain't Necessarily So.... this is what he said "....I've already explained to you that my life is quite complete and satisfying without gods or religions. You may need them, but I don't."

Then you did the Hawking reply, I'm lost as to what it has to do with what you quoted.

I have no idea what Hawking wanted, I'm assuming he hated his condition. I don't think I'd want to live like that but I might change my mind if in that situation.

I find it interesting when a person says how complete his life is. And possibly how happy he is, and satisfied. I suppose such a person is satisfied and happy (?) when he is about to die, or when a loved one dies also. Happy, satisfied, and ready to go.

 

[Audie]

I find it interesting when a person says how complete his life is. And possibly how happy he is, and satisfied. I suppose such a person is satisfied and happy (?) when he is about to die, or when a loved one dies also. Happy, satisfied, and ready to go.

We hear that there are no atheists in the foxholes.

But Christians? When they see the tanks a-comin'
what do they do?

Why, they say "Glory be, I is about to receive e-ternal life!!"

Right?

 

[Audie]

So you think all believers must take each day of creation in the Genesis account as a day of 24 hours even if you personally don't believe it?

haha, lets see if you can stack up even two "Believers" (who all get
their Truth from God) who believe the same thing.

 

[John53]

I find it interesting when a person says how complete his life is. And possibly how happy he is, and satisfied. I suppose such a person is satisfied and happy (?) when he is about to die, or when a loved one dies also. Happy, satisfied, and ready to go.

So people should be miserable and unsatisfied so they can cope with death?

 

[ecco]

OK! He abided more bad things than just slavery. He also abided and partook in rape. He also committed genocide.

But you say: "That does not mean He is like that."
Of course, it means He is like that! Open your eyes.

So then are all humans guilty (like that) if that is what some do?

Try to follow the conversation and respond appropriately. An off-topic question is not addressing the comment.

 

[night912]

I find it interesting when a person says how complete his life is. And possibly how happy he is, and satisfied. I suppose such a person is satisfied and happy (?) when he is about to die, or when a loved one dies also. Happy, satisfied, and ready to go.

One could still be satisfied and see their life as complete even when they or a loved one is about to die. If they were satisfied with the the life that they lived and/or with that person that is about to die.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No? So all things are not clean to Christians who pray and give thanks? God did not show Peter a bunch of unclean animals and said what He cleans is not unclean?

His commandment is to believe and to love.

The idea of "commanded to believe", is asanine and ridiculous.

"I command you to believe in santa".

See? Absurd.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

He abided a lot of wicked things when He came here also. That does not mean He is like that.

It surely doesn't mean that he's against slavery either.

He doesn't seem to care that they kept slaves.
But he did care what somebody ate on a certain day of the week or that somebody worked on a sunday, I mean saturday, I mean sunday, ... wait, which was it again?
Either way, you're to be killed if you do!

Makes perfect sense.

 

[Audie]

Try to follow the conversation and respond appropriately. An off-topic question is not addressing the comment.

Seriously

 

[dad]

As I said:
while on earth you are bound to follow God's laws or be a hypocrite.

That has nothing to do with slander about God supporting slavery. Nor are believers bound by old dietary laws, etc.

 

[dad]

It surely doesn't mean that he's against slavery either.

He doesn't seem to care that they kept slaves.
But he did care what somebody ate on a certain day of the week or that somebody worked on a sunday, I mean saturday, I mean sunday, ... wait, which was it again?
Either way, you're to be killed if you do!

Makes perfect sense.

He is against slavery. He does not like the oppression of rich men. He is against the sweatshops and slavery we have today. He will stop the world soon so we can get off.

 

[dad]

The "kindergarten stages"?

1Ye are the children of the LORD your God:

Moses said: "And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh".

We are not ye! Ancient Israel was who He gave those rules to.

11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: 12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. 13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. 16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

Ro 14:2 -For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

 

[dad]

So Peter is more important than Jesus in your religion?

Jesus never said we could not eat stuff! Nor did He say slavery was good. He said He sets us free, and that it is not what we eat that defiles a man!

 

[dad]

OK! He abided more bad things than just slavery. He also abided and partook in rape. He also committed genocide.

But you say: "That does not mean He is like that."
Of course, it means He is like that! Open your eyes.

Just because He does not send lightning bolts to destroy Walmarts does not mean He supports the sort of labor practices some factories they may use, or how they may treat workers. When He steps in to end wickedness it is all over. Until then, we live in a wicked ol world.

 

[dad]

The idea of "commanded to believe", is asanine and ridiculous.

"I command you to believe in santa".

See? Absurd.

Not really. It may be a bit like saying
'in 40 miles you will see a bend in the road when you get there, do not turn left, because there is a cliff with no fence that your car will drive over if you do'
Where there is a choice in what to do (believe in this case) we are responsible for what choice we make.

 

[John53]

Not what I asked... I asked is Peter more important than Jesus in your religion?

Jesus never said we could not eat stuff! Nor did He say slavery was good. He said He sets us free, and that it is not what we eat that defiles a man!

Which version of the bible are you using? Mine reads differently.

 

[shunyadragon]

That has nothing to do with slander about God supporting slavery. Nor are believers bound by old dietary laws, etc.

it is not slander it literally in the OT if you accept the OT as literal.

 

[ecco]

That has nothing to do with slander about God supporting slavery. Nor are believers bound by old dietary laws, etc.

Deny, deny, deny, pick and choose, pick and choose, that's about all you do on the forum.