Arrogant atheist

[manicsloth]

Stu, I love the fact that you completely miss the point. You list a load of chromosome numbers but my point was this, evolution predicts things then we prove they are true. It predicted the chromosome fusion, did the bible? No it didn't. And don't bother looking for it now because it won't be a prediction. So my challenge to you Stu; Predict something using the bible and see if it is true. I also love that you call me behind the times when your info comes form the bible which is hundreds of years old.

Prediction, test, confirmation is how science works, not test, observe, fit with beliefs. I would go further and give you actual proof but my post would be moderated out of existence, it's taking 7 hours for the mods to approve my posts as it is. Stu come to a real forum where I can show how ridiculous you are or hide here behind mods who won't show how ungrounded religion is. I read the beginning of this article and you know why atheists leave fast from here? Not because you lot are clever or even right, because your mods see to it that we can't post. Hide behind your mods if you must, I'm off to join the real world.

You claim god affects everything and yet we cannot measure this effect. Does that even sound rational to you?

This will be my last post on this forum because if I respond again my post will absolutely get deleted, the mods don't want me to prove you guys wrong.

[Danieltwotwenty]

This will be my last post on this forum because if I respond again my post will absolutely get deleted, the mods don't want me to prove you guys wrong.

Quite a fitting statement considering the topic.

[Stu]

Stu, I love the fact that you completely miss the point.

Not quite.

You list a load of chromosome numbers but my point was this, evolution predicts things then we prove they are true. It predicted the chromosome fusion, did the bible? No it didn't. And don't bother looking for it now because it won't be a prediction. So my challenge to you Stu; Predict something using the bible and see if it is true. I also love that you call me behind the times when your info comes form the bible which is hundreds of years old.

Wait, what the...

So let me get this right.
Evolution predicted chromosomal fusion (CF) because apes and humans have a common ancestry.

As was my point (which you missed), creationists and intelligent design proponents (I'm both) predict a common design; therefore it would be no surprise if apes and humans originally had the same number of chromosomes. Do you not understand this?

They are of a similar design layout.
Your argument is that evolution predicted CF therefore evolution is true -- the point you are missing is that CF is not incompatible within the design framework. It is not evidence for evolution, if that evidence is just as easily compatible within design. As I pointed out comparative biology was used by creationists as proof of a common designer before it was used as proof of common descent.


Furthermore, let me ask you this -- what if evolution predicts something and it is proven to be wrong? And what if this trend is repeated over and over and over again? What then. Is that therefore evidence against evolution?

1. Evolution predicted that the cell would be nothing more than a "simple lump of protoplasm", not the complex, machine-guided bio-factory we now know to be true.

2. Evolution predicted many many intermediate fossils to account for the gradual evolution of life on earth.
- The exact opposite is true. Since Darwin's time, the fossil record has remained consistent in it's lack of intermediate fossils. Darwin's dilemma remains as strong today as when Darwin first recognised this failing.

3. Evolution predicted that molecules from one organism were very different from another. Dogs were made from dog molecules and rats were made from rat molecules. They aren't.

4. During the 1960's it was predicted (according to Darwinain principles) that "the search for homologous genes is quite futile". Yeah they certainly got that one wrong, as it is now used as proof for common descent; how's that for irony!!

5. The same regulatory genes are expressed in similar regions of insects and mammals (like the eye) -- evolution predicted the opposite.

6. Evolution predicted junk DNA.
- The exact opposite is proving to be true. Even (now finally acknowleged by evolutionists to have function in alternative splicing) intronic elements of DNA were predicted to be non-functional.
- So to are new functions continually being found for pseudogenes and repetitive DNA in terms of regulation and error correction.

7. Evolution predicted the "central dogma".
- We now know that epigenetics plays a critical role in the development of life -- we are not solely the product of our DNA code.

This really is the nail in the coffin of evolution (as far as I'm concerned, these are of course my views).
We still do not know where the body plan for an organism lies!! It is not believed to reside within DNA. Now how and where, if we are the product of random mutation to the DNA sequence, did the body plan arise, that all-important blueprint of life.

Prediction, test, confirmation is how science works, not test, observe, fit with beliefs.

And yet that is exactly what Darwinism does!! Evolutionists are continually surprised by what they find and they massage the theory to fit the data.

I would go further and give you actual proof but my post would be moderated out of existence, it's taking 7 hours for the mods to approve my posts as it is. Stu come to a real forum where I can show how ridiculous you are or hide here behind mods who won't show how ungrounded religion is. I read the beginning of this article and you know why atheists leave fast from here? Not because you lot are clever or even right, because your mods see to it that we can't post. Hide behind your mods if you must, I'm off to join the real world.

This is really quite sad. Your intellect, your savvy is so astounding that no one could possibly stand toe-to-toe with you in a debate and hold their own.
No, it is you who are hiding behind the mods of Evidence for God, not me.
Come on over to Uncommon Descent if you would like to debate, or PM me a link to this forum you refer to.

I was like you once, thought I had all the answers, now I just enjoy a healthy debate.

You claim god affects everything and yet we cannot measure this effect. Does that even sound rational to you?

When did I ever say that?

This will be my last post on this forum because if I respond again my post will absolutely get deleted, the mods don't want me to prove you guys wrong.

As I said, you are hiding behind the mods. It's the ultimate fallacy -- my argument is so devastaing and true that it would'nt possibly be allowed to stand.
If you remain civil and don't attack the individual, and argue your case for evolution, I don't see why you would have your comments deleted.

Anyway, this isn't personal man; I just think neo-Darwinian evolution is entirely false, even a mockery; and has persisted through pressure groups and aggressive proponents, rather than on the merits of the theory itself. Once I started doing the research for myself, I was most disturbed at what people considered "evidence". Many folks were being sold half-truths and selective "facts", which I find unacceptable and immoral.

I have nothing against atheists (I have many atheist friends) or evolutionists. Debate is debate; once it's over we shake hands, say well done and walk away.

[BryanH]

I have nothing against atheists (I have many atheist friends) or evolutionists. Debate is debate; once it's over we shake hands, say well done and walk away.

Thank you for the debate. It was interesting. I think we both have made good points over this discussion. I will now rest my case. As you have said, accepting Jesus into your heart is a personal choice and I got nothing to debate on that. Personal choices are not my concern. Have fun and keep in touch.

[Stu]

Thank you for the debate. It was interesting. I think we both have made good points over this discussion. I will now rest my case. As you have said, accepting Jesus into your heart is a personal choice and I got nothing to debate on that. Personal choices are not my concern. Have fun and keep in touch.

Back away now, I don't do hugs, they're not manly enough

Yeah of course, there is a difference between showing the necessity for God or a creator, and providing absolute proof on which God is the "right" God.
Now I've got some homework to do surrounding Constantine

[neo-x]

hey Bryan,

sorry for jumping in late guys...but a couple of posts were interesting...so I thought to dive in as well.

Of course this is true, but you see, as I said before, something built on lies and blood can't be God's work.

Any framework of idea can be abused but it does not mean that the origin of something is invalidated because of it. You are actually commiting a reverse genetic fallacy. Constantine, good or bad, proves nothing. It is simply irrelevant.

Let's not forget as well how Christianity managed to spread in Europe and from here to the rest of the world.

So what? what does this have to do with the teaching of Christ?

So you see in terms of cause-effect, Christianity was just a political tool and nothing more.

lets not be vague here, what do you mean when you say "Christianity", please define?
In a nutshell you are saying that all of Christianity, everyone, was a victim of political manipulation and nothing more. Can you substantiate this claim? How so?

but the Bible is quite far away from what God ever intended for us

Are you certain of this? how do you know that it was something different than what we see today? What are the differences?

Never the less, these scripts were written by men/persons/people. These scripts are not the creation of God. These scripts are the "word" of God which has been put into human words by men/persons/people. The scrips were written by different people and at different time intervals.

As you all have noticed people are different and we have different opinions about religion, God and all related subjects. The people who wrote the scripts make no exception from these human traits of personality.

The bible as a whole is a useful book that teaches us to be good people, moral values, respect for others, equality between all peoples of the world.

BUT from my point of view, the bible can't be taken seriously as a PROPHECY.

It is one thing to say that there is a human context involved in penning down the scriptures, but it is a whole different thing to say that those who wrote these accounts were not loyal to their work in a deliberate fashion as to fulfill some agenda. Quite a stretch to imply without evidence, don't you think? Unless you can show be specific and not vague in terms and tell me which prophecy do you think is a hoax and which isn't, or all of it together, I may consider this an un-educated opinion about biblical scholarship but not a statement which has some weight.

Let me also tell you that Christianity is more than the Bible. Go on, burn all the Bibles in the world, but it won't change anything spiritually. If there is a God, bible or no Bible, he exists; if he commanded something, it will come to pass regardless of our acknowledgement of it. The Bible is not God, is it? Neither is it a requirement of salvation. I do not know what is your objection to it in full, but I do not get whats all the fuss about?

My opinion is that at the moment you can't prove that God is real or not. We simply do not have the necessary level of understanding for that.

No, what most people lack is faith.

But I can prove that God is not the only deity that was involved in the Creation of the Universe.

Please, if you could, go ahead; I'd like you to try and prove this to me.

The point I'm trying to make is that by simply applying logic and common sense, is that although Christian people believe in God and the Bible, there are other religions in the world which are far more older.

God, if indeed is real, would logically imply that he is not a philosophical construct that anyone can just imagine and make up. If that is not your definition of God then your statement is severely flawed and contradictory on multiple levels. If God is real (not in the philosophical sense) then there can't be others, if he is not, then the definition is not required to start with and you shouldn't worry about it.

To make things more clear, Christianity is not the only true religion in the world. If you agree that God exists and it is something real, well, then you have to agree that other deities are also real. You can't just say: "My God is true and yours is a figment of your imagination". Christianity says: "There is only one true God and only way to Heavens!". Really? So other older religions in the world, much more older than Christianity, are wrong and pagan.

Let me make a statement "Bryan (the person on this forum) is not the only true Bryan (the person on this forum) in the universe."

Does that make any sense to you? If you are indeed Bryan, you are exclusive. There is only one and only one, you.

Truth is not plural Bryan, if something is true then it can't be false at the same time, can it? Any other construct violates the law of non-contradiction. I'm not trying to prove here that my God is the real one but as to how I find your statements, flawed.

[wazatron]

I started reading this post and quickly got bored.

To all the believers/atheists.... Can you accept the notion that maybe you are wrong?

If you can answer yes... then we can have a conversation.

We are talking about GOD here.
Science has not proved the existence/non exsistence of god. FACT
Science is fantastic it has unravelled the universe for us but not proven the above.

And to blindly believe in a book - yes a book (which has been proven and come on lets be honest WRONG and vaugue in many instances) I Havnt read the bible for about 10 years but im pretty sure it was nasty to women, homos and basically everyone accept men. So lets go ahead and believe in this and sit back and watch the world advance.

Note: nothing against muslims but look at them blindly following a faith, what has this religion acheived? Heaven?
Look at Western society where there are pockets of people willing to question beliefs - look how far they have come.

i dont know if there is a God but i stand more for the athiests who want undeniable evidence to believe (which is fair, dont u think believers?) rather than believing because you were told to believe - lets face it, thats why you believe!
To all the Christians, you realise if you were born in Pakistan you would be muslims and Jesus would not be your GOD.
1 billion christians, 1 billion jews, 1 billion hindus...etc some one has got it wrong right? Or maybe everyones got it wrong? THINK ABOUT IT!!

This is a huge topic and i do not have the time or intelligence to convey all my thoughts.
im still wasting my time. not any more.

[Stu]

I started reading this post and quickly got bored.

To all the believers/atheists.... Can you accept the notion that maybe you are wrong?

If you can answer yes... then we can have a conversation.

We are talking about GOD here.
Science has not proved the existence/non exsistence of god. FACT
Science is fantastic it has unravelled the universe for us but not proven the above.

And to blindly believe in a book - yes a book (which has been proven and come on lets be honest WRONG and vaugue in many instances) I Havnt read the bible for about 10 years but im pretty sure it was nasty to women, homos and basically everyone accept men. So lets go ahead and believe in this and sit back and watch the world advance.

Note: nothing against muslims but look at them blindly following a faith, what has this religion acheived? Heaven?
Look at Western society where there are pockets of people willing to question beliefs - look how far they have come.

i dont know if there is a God but i stand more for the athiests who want undeniable evidence to believe (which is fair, dont u think believers?) rather than believing because you were told to believe - lets face it, thats why you believe!
To all the Christians, you realise if you were born in Pakistan you would be muslims and Jesus would not be your GOD.
1 billion christians, 1 billion jews, 1 billion hindus...etc some one has got it wrong right? Or maybe everyones got it wrong? THINK ABOUT IT!!

This is a huge topic and i do not have the time or intelligence to convey all my thoughts.
im still wasting my time. not any more.

If this stuff bores you and you're wasting your time, why the did you join the forum?

Further; clearly you have ignored what has been said in the thread -- and instead chose to post your idea of what we (as believers) think and not. Several of your statements are unfounded and just flat-out ignore arguments put forward by those who believe in a creator.

[Katabole]

And to blindly believe in a book - yes a book (which has been proven and come on lets be honest WRONG and vaugue in many instances) I Havnt read the bible for about 10 years but im pretty sure it was nasty to women, homos and basically everyone accept men. So lets go ahead and believe in this and sit back and watch the world advance.

A revelation in writing must necessarily be given in "words." The separate words therefore in which it is given, must have the same importance and authority as the revelation as a whole. If we accept the Bible as a revelation from God, and receive it as inspired by God, we cannot separate the words of which that inspired revelation is made up.

The Bible is its own best proof of its inspiration. It claims to be "the Word of God"; (Mark 7:13) and if it be not what it claims to be, then it is not only not a "good book," but is unworthy of further attention. Jesus is not saying here in Mark that tradition makes Him, the living Word irrelevant; He is saying tradition makes His 'Written Word' irrelevant.

I cannot understand the position of those who assert and believe that many of the Bible's parts are myths, mistranslations and forgeries, while at the same time they continue to quote it, write commentaries upon it and accept endorsements and dignities for preaching or lecturing about it. The Bible simply claims to be the Word of God. It does not attempt to establish its claim, or seek to prove it. It merely assumes it and asserts it. It is for us to believe it or to leave it. But, by believing it, our aim then is to seek to understand what God has thus written for our learning.

There are a number of concepts that arise because of this claim, that set Christianity in opposition to the very spirit of our age.

Objectivity
True Christianity starts from the premise that there is a source of truth outside of us. God’s Word is truth (Psalm 119:160; John 17:17). It is objectively true—meaning it is true whether it speaks subjectively to any given individual or not; it is true regardless of how anyone feels about it; it is true in an absolute sense. But authentic Christianity regards Scripture as the objective revelation of God’s truth. It is God’s Word to humanity, and its true meaning is determined by God; it is not something that can be shaped according to the preferences of individual hearers. (2Pet 1:21) and (Rev 19:10).

Rationality
Biblical Christianity is also based on the conviction that the objective revelation of Scripture is rational. The Bible makes good sense. It contains no contradictions, no errors, and no unsound principles. (Anyone who has studied the Massorah knows this). Anything that does contradict Scripture is untrue. As Christians, we know that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2). He does not contradict Himself. His truth is perfectly self-consistent. That sort of black-and-white rationality is one of the main reasons biblical Christianity is intolerable in a generation that rejects reason. Compare churches today to what was taught in (Acts 17:11)

Veracity
Authentic Christianity is based on the conviction that God’s objective revelation (the Bible) approached rationally yields divine truth in perfectly sufficient measure. Everything we need to know for life and godliness is there for us in Scripture. We don’t need to seek principles for godly or successful living through any other source. Scripture is not only wholly truth; it is also the highest standard of all truth—the rule by which all truth-claims must be measured.

Authority
Because Christians believe Scripture is true, they teach its precepts with authority and without apology. The Bible makes bold claims, and faithful Christians affirm it boldly and without compromise.

Incompatibility
Scripture says, “No lie is of the truth” (1John 2:21). As Christians, we know that whatever contradicts truth is by definition false. In other words, truth is incompatible with error. Jesus Himself affirmed the utter exclusivity of Christianity. He said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6). “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

Moreover, as Christians we understand that whatever opposes God’s Word or departs from it in any way is a danger to the very cause of truth.

Integrity
Since all of the above is true, genuine Christianity sees integrity as an essential virtue and hypocrisy as a horrible vice.

The next time your walking down a university corridor Wazatron, check out Theology class. Theology wasn't called the queen of sciences for 1700 years for no apparent reason.

Can you accept the notion that maybe you are wrong?

Can you? Spend 30 minutes or so of your time watching the following video:

Is Faith Delusional? by professor John Lennox

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cp1W_3ddaJI

[sandy_mcd]

As was my point (which you missed), creationists and intelligent design proponents (I'm both) predict a common design; therefore it would be no surprise if apes and humans originally had the same number of chromosomes.

Intelligent design does not predict anything. Designed creatures could be similar or they could be different, depending on the whim of the creator.
How can the idea of a designer be disproven?

[Kurieuo]

As was my point (which you missed), creationists and intelligent design proponents (I'm both) predict a common design; therefore it would be no surprise if apes and humans originally had the same number of chromosomes.

Intelligent design does not predict anything. Designed creatures could be similar or they could be different, depending on the whim of the creator.
How can the idea of a designer be disproven?

[wazatron]

wazatron wrote:
Can you accept the notion that maybe you are wrong?

Katabole:
Can you? Spend 30 minutes or so of your time watching the following video:

Katabole - YES with all my heart i can admit that i may be wrong about my stance and am always open to new facts/evidence. Katoble and all the believers - Can you say the same about the existence of God? Can you also say that there is a possibilty that God does not exist and that you are wrong?
....... i didint think so. Thats what seperates us.

[Silvertusk]

Wazatron - I approved your last post to give you a chance to justify some of your blanket generalisations. Do not presume to know an individuals mind - this is verging on an attack on character - You are treading a fine line here and I would draw your attention to our board guidelines and rules.

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... f=1&t=2517

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... hp?f=1&t=4

[neo-x]

Waza,

If you are serious about talking then show some seriousness in your post.

wazatron » Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:00 pm

wazatron wrote:
Can you accept the notion that maybe you are wrong?

Katabole:
Can you? Spend 30 minutes or so of your time watching the following video:

Katabole - YES with all my heart i can admit that i may be wrong about my stance and am always open to new facts/evidence. Katoble and all the believers - Can you say the same about the existence of God? Can you also say that there is a possibilty that God does not exist and that you are wrong?
....... i didint think so. Thats what seperates us.

What is this, a joke? your sarcastic sense trying to amuse yourself?

What makes you think that we know there is no God but we are still stubborn to follow something that is not real and does not exist? Who told you that? Or is it your own try at a guess?

It is a pathetic, poor assumption, try harder.

[wazatron]

I simply asked a question- could you be wrong about God? And this is the typical response i get.
I can admit i could be wrong in my beliefs, but you cannot.
Hence we have war in the world.

My last post.