Wow, talking all big and bad just because you're friends with a chemist. I see
POLL: Is there a God ??
- Thread starter megablue
- Start date
Unfortunately you said a whole lot without addressing either of the two points I brought up.
How are they biased? They are taking scripture directly from the Bible, and showing when the event historically occurred outside the Bible. Events that all scholars, secular or religious, agreed to have happened. What is biased?
They are not giving their opinion.
Miller-Urey categorically falsified abiogenesis, lol - by failing utterly to produce even one basic building block of life. Nothing approaching life resulted and no lab experiment since has done so either. Science does not in any way support abiogenesis any more than it did when Louis Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation. So, what science conclusively proves is that life only comes from pre-existing life. (Science does science things!) The more science you apply to abiogenesis the dumber it looks. Not to mention the other glaring and fundamental reality of Miller-Urey: Who does the scientist conducting the experiment represent? You just slapped yourself in your own face.
(Science also overwhelmingly demonstrates that variation only exists within a kind)
This is why I have zero respect for atheists. Intellectually dishonest liars. Tries to forward the flimsiest non-evidence as proof while automatically rejecting the strongest evidence to the contrary.
Then surely you can find the exact same thing from a source that is a clearly more scholarly. Without implicit or not, they have bias. If I can get ridiculed for using Google as a source, then you can get it for using very clear Christian sites.
What the hell are you even talking about? It did not.
Biggest pot calling the kettle black I've seen on here in a while. What's more intellectually dishonest than prioritizing faith over any kind of science?
I have no idea what you are even talking about in reference to Google...here is an excerpt from one of the articles, you can let me know how biased it is...
(1) Some time before 500 BC, the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel’s long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26). He further predicted that the Messiah would be “cut off,” killed, and that this event would take place prior to a second destruction of Jerusalem. Abundant documentation shows that these prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus Christ. The decree regarding the restoration of Jerusalem was issued by Persia’s King Artaxerxes to the Hebrew priest Ezra in 458 BC, 483 years later the ministry of Jesus Christ began in Galilee. (Remember that due to calendar changes, the date for the start of Christ’s ministry is set by most historians at about AD 26. Also note that from 1 BC to AD 1 is just one year.) Jesus’ crucifixion occurred only a few years later, and about four decades later, in AD 70 came the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.
The Google thing is in reference to a separate thing where my sources on some topic came from Google and I somehow got ridiculed for that.
Cool story about Daniel though, still don’t care
Your faith in anything that appears to confirm your position is greater than a lot of faith I witness from Christians.
lol I literally exposed you for your horrible case of confirmation bias and now you constantly claim that it happened to me. Accept that I was right about you and move on
If you say so, boss. LOL 😂
Gonna attempt to avoid the Matteo-rabbit hole that happens each time someone confronts your mistaken comments.
If you had actual proof he’d find a way to deny it. Just quit entertaining him, this is a joke to him and funny.
It does seem as if he’s upset he doesn’t get to have that feeling from maybe anything in life. You can have it my guy, give it an honest shot without shitting on every aspect, feel the wholesome goodness of some uplifting songs and fellowship that evolves through a good sermon.
My mom and I tell each other about our sermons every Sunday, gives us a wonderful reason to talk, my father and GMA and I also text about church on Sunday. You make friends with common interests and mostly good intentions in all aspects. It provides joy and family for those who don’t have it otherwise.
Why are these things bad? Lol
It does seem as if he’s upset he doesn’t get to have that feeling from maybe anything in life. You can have it my guy, give it an honest shot without shitting on every aspect, feel the wholesome goodness of some uplifting songs and fellowship that evolves through a good sermon.
My mom and I tell each other about our sermons every Sunday, gives us a wonderful reason to talk, my father and GMA and I also text about church on Sunday. You make friends with common interests and mostly good intentions in all aspects. It provides joy and family for those who don’t have it otherwise.
Why are these things bad? Lol
Damn this is one long thread. I'll put my 2-cents in. I was raised in a Southern Baptist home. Hated going to church every Sunday because it was so long and I got bored easily. Still do. But, it was a good upbringing. Gave me a solid foundation to live out my life. Not saying that a non-Christian household can't accomplish the same thing with their children because they can and they do. Is there a God? Well, faith is believing in something that can't be proven. Nobody knows until they die.
You asked me to address these points:
1. Yes. I have a problem with people who “believe” that marriage is only between one man and one woman - whether that belief is religious or secular - legislating something onto everyone. (I have a hard time believing “many, many” non religious people are opposed to homosexuals being allowed to marry.) I object because that belief requires excluding American citizens from an equal civil right. If my wife and I can get the tax break, why can’t Adam and Steve next door? I don’t think churches should be forced to perform same-sex marriages because the religious ceremony and government contract aspect are two different things. As far as the paperwork goes with the state or for those who get married at the courthouse, we all should enjoy the same rights in the eyes of the law because the Christian Bible doesn’t govern the country. I don’t know how to make that any more clear. (Remember: The Bible, specifically the curse of Ham, was used to justify slavery in the 1860s and then used again nearly a century later to justify segregation, which resulted in Jim Crow laws. I think we can all agree these were theologically incorrect interpretations.)
Point two: If someone tried to pass a law encouraging people to be kind to others based on God is Love, I wouldn’t be upset because we’re presumably loving everyone. I would be opposed to “God is love. But for straight, baptized Christians only” because it excludes non-Christians, non-LGBTQ, non-baptized people from being loved under the law.
As for abortion, I don’t believe the church or state belongs in the doctor’s office. My stance will not change. Don’t believe in abortion? Don’t get or finance one, but don’t tell someone you don’t know whose situation you’re not in what they can’t do with their own body. If the Christian god frowns upon this act as highly as is claimed, the person receiving the abortion will answer to God for their sins at the end and you are not to judge them. Correct?
Tl;dr: It’s not OK to pass legislation based on beliefs if that belief excludes certain people from equality under the law.
And yet you always are there when I comment. You’re not all that great at avoiding me
If he had actual proof? Did you just unintentionally say the quiet part out loud?
Christianity is funny, you’re correct. Let’s sing those hymns and read the gospel then get on our favorite UK sports discussion board and argue with strangers each and every day. You know, the way God intended.
Thanks for the response.
Although I 100% disagree with the post.
This isn't the thread for political conversations, so I will abstain from responding. But I did ask you for clarification, so thanks for the post!
Anti-Christians love to tell Christians how to behave. It’s the only time they tout an objective moral code. I like it. They need to get moral truths any way they can. 
Just calling the hypocrisy where I see it. You’re the biggest exampleAnti-Christians love to tell Christians how to behave. It’s the only time they tout an objective moral code. I like it. They need to get moral truths any way they can.
His hypocrisy isn't limited to this subject either. Pick any thread he has participated in and you will see it there too. I just stopped interacting with him because of it. He was a waste of time and energy.
How about you all do your thing, and the believers do theirs, and we can all just love on without all the hate and posturing?
Most aren’t telling you to go to church, do as you please.
Fine, we follow a make believe god that’s total bullshit and we’re all idiots. But we like being around others that are as stupid as us and together we pray, hug, sing, converse, donate to positive causes, help foreign countries, enjoy a few hours a week being sheep and so stupid.
Is that fair? Is that okay with you all? I’ve admitted how dumb it is and I’m an idiot.
Now can I just go to church without you giving a f*CK and CRAVING to convince someone of changing their mind which will never happen?
Might as well convince my mom to vote Trump and have him over for supper while you’re at it…
Most aren’t telling you to go to church, do as you please.
Fine, we follow a make believe god that’s total bullshit and we’re all idiots. But we like being around others that are as stupid as us and together we pray, hug, sing, converse, donate to positive causes, help foreign countries, enjoy a few hours a week being sheep and so stupid.
Is that fair? Is that okay with you all? I’ve admitted how dumb it is and I’m an idiot.
Now can I just go to church without you giving a f*CK and CRAVING to convince someone of changing their mind which will never happen?
Might as well convince my mom to vote Trump and have him over for supper while you’re at it…
WildcatfaninOhio
All-American
Sorry to revisit this so long after it was posted. But I have a question.
If the creation story is just a story, and not literal, doesn’t that cause major issues for the entire religion? Because if Adam and Eve were just storybook characters, then they didn’t really eat from the tree of knowledge. Then there was no original sin. Then there’s no need for a savior. Then the invisible man’s twisted plan to have Junior tortured and executed so he could forgive everybody was unnecessary. So what’s the point in following xianity if the Adam and Eve story is fiction?
It’s an explanation, imo, about how sinning started and why we have temptation and more importantly why would should avoid them. No different than our instant gratification society, no one wants to wait, they want everything now.
And no it creates no problem for me at all because I don’t take the entire Bible as literal.
We sin because we’re pussies that can’t say no sometimes. Some are better than others at it but we ALL struggle with sinning (or for non believers behaving poorly by our own or societal standards).
The Bible is a playbook to help you not do that so your chances of getting to heaven are better and to a lesser degree so that you’re not a shitty person in physical form on earth.
If you don’t see daily how some
People could use some guidance well tell me where you live so I can go to Eden lol.
It is not hypocrisy to say there are moral truths, a right way to live, and sin, but admit that while I strive to live a God-honoring life, I am a sinner who fails and needs a savior. You may want to reconsider your definition of hypocrisy.
Last edited:
The fact that Matteo’s conjoined twin would find his way into this thread to support his alter ego is really amusing. Thanks for stalking!!
To sin is to miss the mark, which is not living for God. When you sin, you are disobedient to moral truth.
You will reap what you sow. Nevermind Christianity, the Truth and the Way, almost all other relgions and philosophies have incidentally noticed this: they'll clal it karma, they blamed the anger of "the gods," or whatever.
So to is sin. "Your" modern atheism is post-modernism, i.e. make it up as you go according to your own whims or desires. "Who is to say what is right or wrong?" That will have its own consequence too.
You will reap what you sow. Nevermind Christianity, the Truth and the Way, almost all other relgions and philosophies have incidentally noticed this: they'll clal it karma, they blamed the anger of "the gods," or whatever.
So to is sin. "Your" modern atheism is post-modernism, i.e. make it up as you go according to your own whims or desires. "Who is to say what is right or wrong?" That will have its own consequence too.
Aww. It’s cute when you try to be creative with insults. You failed horribly but that was simply precious. So very Christian like of you as well. If you were half as perfect as you thought you were, they would have nailed your dumbass to the cross instead of that other poor schmuck.
It's hypocrisy if you purposefully sin over and over. Aware of your sin yet continue to do it while still toting a moral code through Christianity
“Toting a moral code through Christianity?”
Seems you don’t have a problem with being judgmental while you claim others are judgmental. Time, again, to revisit your understanding of hypocrisy.
That said, I admit we are all occasionally hypocrites. Your desire to police that fact is your issue, not mine.
WildcatfaninOhio
All-American
I always figured if you don’t give a crap about right and wrong, a book of fairy tales ain’t gonna help you. And if the only thing holding you back from committing a “sin” is a book of fairy tales, you’re not a good person. You’re a bad person on a leash.
I freely admit that I can be hypocritical and you love to call me on it any chance you get. Just returning that favor
All of your bad acts are always justified and rationalized by you, often blaming others for your poor behavior. Might be time to man-up and stop being a child.
If you don't take it literally and others do, then that's a problem. God's Word is therefore flawed. His most important way of telling people anything is a confusing mess.
My bad acts? You mean arguing with strangers on the internet? Haha classic Caveman ridiculing me for things that you also do. It's even more funny because I literally just admitted to a fault of mine. Thanks for providing another example of your hypocrisy.
What the hell are you even talking about? Just arguing over nothing so you can get the last word, another Caveman classic. The most predictable poster on here. The only "bad act" that you know about me is that I argue with strangers (which I acknowledged).
The final piece of the trifecta of classic Caveman debate strategies: completely distort my words to fit your argument.
Back to some substance.
There is no current scientific evidence for the theory of abiogenesis, despite some posters’ misunderstandings and gullibility demonstrated on this page. Yet, I am willing to bet most people who post on this board were taught that theory in school. There is more scientific evidence for design. However, because atheist’s beliefs on religion are permitted to influence teaching in public schools, most publicly educated people did not learn of design in school.
There is no current scientific evidence for the theory of abiogenesis, despite some posters’ misunderstandings and gullibility demonstrated on this page. Yet, I am willing to bet most people who post on this board were taught that theory in school. There is more scientific evidence for design. However, because atheist’s beliefs on religion are permitted to influence teaching in public schools, most publicly educated people did not learn of design in school.
Similar threads
