Thursday, 15 May 2008

Perfection?


If god is perfect, why does he make so many mistakes? Let's take the story of Noah's ark, for instance. In Genesis 6:6, god is repentant for creating man. This is an explicit admission of a mistake on god's part. He feels sorry for what he has done. So, he decides to wipe the Earth of all creatures to wipe out the wickedness of humanity, thus taking out his anger at humans on all animals.

According to Xians, we are all wicked, so why is there still wickedness? Didn't god wipe it all out with the flood? Shouldn't he have known that his plan wouldn't work? In Genesis 8:21, he again seems to be repentant for doing what he has done, which is another admission of error as well as an admission of immorality. Why worship this god that obviously is incompetent and immoral?

39 comments:

Deejay said...

you're really terribly ignorant.

You will answer one day unless you repent.

doxologica said...

Why be obsessed with proving that the "Christian God" doesn't exist? Nobody gives this much attention to disproving Martians. Live your life and find out when you die.

GCT said...

deejay,
How am I ignorant? Why don't you illuminate me? And, do you really think that making threats for god is moral or helpful? Do you think that when god threatens us that it's moral?

doxologica,
The reason that it's more important to talk about the Xian god than Martians is because the majority of the populace doesn't believe in Martians and try to shove that belief down the throats of others. If Xians could live and let live and let others believe as they want to, it wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, that is not the case in this country.

MS Quixote said...

"If Xians could live and let live and let others believe as they want to, it wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, that is not the case in this country."

GCT, well said. Your sentiment is the direct result Christians engaging in activities they have no business participating in.

Question of Identity said...

GCT
I hate sexual images constantly pushed down my throat - sexuality is worshiped on our streets,even children are abused as they are subjected to sexual images(and no I do not hate sex in the right context)but I don't hear you launch a campaign against it.

I hate the mess that people get into because of their promiscuity - the hurt and pain that they suffer as they jump into one sexual relationship after another.

I hate the fact that God has supplied enough for everyone to eat well and yet there are starving people in the world. Christian Aid and other Christian agencies have been at the forefront of campaigning against the injustices of this - why don't you come alongside us and spend as much energy fighting this as you do fighting and expressing your hate for Jesus?

If you really care, why don't you spend as much energy caring for the homeless? Many Christian charities do this I bet there is one in your town!

Why don't you come along side us and come to know what real Christianity is about?

Your hate for Jesus is quite clearly stronger than your love for others. WHY?

acidkoolaid said...

I hope that nobody debates this guy Question of Identity (QOI). I have just recently found this site yet I know that issues such as promiscuity, homelessness, and food shortage is ignored by those who question the xian "faith". It appears to me that QOI is simply utilizing false logic in an attempt to manipulate; to draw people in for his own self conceived verbal slaughter. I know exactly what "real christianity" is about - its about finding false promises in a book that is the alleged holy word of god; followers that lie, cheat, and steal when it serves them; pastors that put on a kind and friendly face when on the pulpit but don't have time for the congregation when they are in need; a "god" that "loves" us so much that he hasn't shown his face in 2000 years and previously let his "people" wonder around in the desert for 40 years because he was pissed off but then ordered them to kill and inhabit the "promised land". I admit it, I'm like the Jews you read about at the alleged cruxifiction - god! show yourself, show yourself to be kind and loving, give me proof that you are god. Afterall, where've you been for 2000 years? Where have you been when I believed and repeatedly cried out!

Funny thing QOI, Brits are notorious unbelievers, "if you really care, why don't you spend as much energy caring for the [Brits]"?

And as I've learned, but can't speak for another sole here, I "hate" yaawy, jesus, and the holy ghost because they first hated me.

acidkoolaid said...

I meant to say:

I have just recently found this site yet I know that issues such as promiscuity, homelessness, and food shortage is NOT ignored by those who question the xian "faith".

Question of Identity said...

"I hope that nobody debates this guy"

What are you afraid of acid?
I am here only talking about love.

Talking about loving actions – I repost the following comment:

Man is nothing but:
FAT enough for seven bars of soap
IRON enough for one medium sized snail
SUGAR enough for seven cups of tea
LIME enough to whitewash one chicken coop
MAGNESIUM enough for one dose of salts
Phosphorous enough to ti two hundred matches
POTASH enough to explode one toy crane
SULPHUR enough to rid one dog of fleas

Where does love come from?

It is pure nonsense to suggest that love can evolve! Fat iron sugar lime magnesium phosphorus potash and sulfur can't just accidentally formulate and evolve to produce loving actions!

acidkoolaid said...

QOI - I won't debate. Particularly, elementary logic such as your last statement. Now maybe if you can uncategorically prove why a "loving" god (since you mention "love") has "permitted", "allowed", or brought about by his own "providence" (or whatever excuse adjective/phraseology you deem appropriate) devastation such as that in Myanmar and China (not to mention the daily hells that many people are going through), then maybe I'll listen to your conjectures.

acidkoolaid said...

Incidentally, QOI, I see that, unlike this blog which provides great latitude in allowing those of differing opinion to state such opinion, you censor opposing statements in you blog!

Steven Bently said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Steven Bently said...

Speaking of Genesis in just the first few chapters, it get worse on through the bible.

Well it seems that bible god ain't too smart, he had to ask Adam and Eve where they were hiding and then he made coats of skins for them, because their nakedness offened him, shoo wee.

And nowhere in the bible has god ever said that he regretted having created Satan or evil.

Then he asked Cain where is thou brother? He's at the local bar..idiot!!!

Cain said, the punishment you gave me was too much to bear, everyone who finds me will want to slay me, when there were only two other people on earth...duh?

Then soon after the flood, in Genesis we have the dreaded wicked city Sodom and Gomorrah, what happened to the Noah's family wickedness filter, to filter out all wickedness in the world?

Didn't work for very long, agree?

Seems like god is missing a few bricks, short of a full load.

GCT said...

ms,
I know that you are a staunch advocate of church/state separation, and I applaud you for that.

QOI,
"I hate sexual images constantly pushed down my throat - sexuality is worshiped on our streets,even children are abused as they are subjected to sexual images(and no I do not hate sex in the right context)but I don't hear you launch a campaign against it."

How is that the same thing? Are people trying to force you to have sex or believe in something about sex? Yes, our culture is saturated with it, because it sells. It, however, does not do me injustice. When my rights are taken from me by Xians that seek to strip them, that does me injustice.

"I hate the fact that God has supplied enough for everyone to eat well and yet there are starving people in the world."

god has done no such thing, science has. Better farming methods have opened up these crops. But, I share your sentiment that it is tragic that people are starving. I'm glad that your all-loving god is doing something about it - oh wait, he's not.

"Christian Aid and other Christian agencies have been at the forefront of campaigning against the injustices of this - why don't you come alongside us and spend as much energy fighting this as you do fighting and expressing your hate for Jesus?"

I don't actually hate Jesus you know. I didn't start this blog and name it, for one. Secondly, it's hyperbole. Third, it's impossible to actually hate a fictitious character. Also, Xian charities are not as great as you might think. They, more often than not, come with strings attached as the people involved tend to take that opportunity to proselytize. Some soup kitchens won't serve food to people who don't first attend a chapel service, for instance. If you really want to do some good, press Bush to stop giving federal money to these agencies and start financing secular agencies more.

"If you really care, why don't you spend as much energy caring for the homeless?"

I appreciate how you assume that the only thing I do in my life is criticize Xianity.

"Why don't you come along side us and come to know what real Christianity is about?"

Why don't you tell us all what "real Christianity" is about?

"Your hate for Jesus is quite clearly stronger than your love for others. WHY?"

Again, no hate here. You are bringing your own biases into this.

GCT said...

QOI,
"I am here only talking about love."

Which love would that be?

"Where does love come from?

It is pure nonsense to suggest that love can evolve! Fat iron sugar lime magnesium phosphorus potash and sulfur can't just accidentally formulate and evolve to produce loving actions!"

This is just an argument from incredulity. You can't personally understand how it happened, so it must not have. Yet, do you have a competing hypothesis? Nope. Tell me, do you deny evolution?

Question of Identity said...

"How is that the same thing? Are people trying to force you to have sex or believe in something about sex? Yes, our culture is saturated with it, because it sells. It, however, does not do me injustice."

A Christian would never force you to become a Christian - you have freedom of choice. The images we see on the streets - we don't have any freedom whatsoever - it is shoved down our throats! As far as the impact on society - you only have to read the papers to see the lack of sexual morality in our world. People are being perverted into thinking that sexuality is worthy of worship.

This stuff encourages rape, prostitution, promiscuity, infidelity, marriage breakdowns, pedophilia, - my guess is that everyone on this blog in some form or other has been adversely affected through the way sexuality is worshiped and pushed down our throats!

Steven Bently said...

Hell I like porn, I watch porn regularly I see nothing wrong with it. I have no desire to rape anyone or molest children.

But google in: "pastor charged" and see how many children are raped and molested by christian lead by the holy spirit pastors, it's downright frightning.

GCT said...

QOI,
"A Christian would never force you to become a Christian - you have freedom of choice."

Many Xians want to enforce their beliefs on me through law, so what you say here is simply false.

"The images we see on the streets - we don't have any freedom whatsoever - it is shoved down our throats!"

Actually, you do. You could get people together to buy ad time/space and replace those ads. Isn't that what those horrendous god billboards are supposed to be?

"As far as the impact on society - you only have to read the papers to see the lack of sexual morality in our world."

What is immoral about sex? Are you perhaps referring to things like Eliot Spitzer's hookups? Do you really think those things didn't happen in the past?

"People are being perverted into thinking that sexuality is worthy of worship."

Worthy of worship? This is just plain silly and you trying to lead this down a rabbit hole away from the obvious issues that are there in regards to Xians pushing their religion on others.

"This stuff encourages rape, prostitution, promiscuity, infidelity, marriage breakdowns, pedophilia..."

Again, do you think these things didn't occur before the last couple of years?

"...my guess is that everyone on this blog in some form or other has been adversely affected through the way sexuality is worshiped and pushed down our throats!"

And you pulled that from where exactly? Maybe this is simply a reaction to the fact that people are waking up from the oppressive attitudes that the church holds towards sex. Yes, it's your own damn fault. The church pushed their ideas about the immorality of sex down people's throats for so long that it became this taboo thing that attracted us so much due to its status. Now that the control the church has had is dwindling, people are exploring those taboos and finding their freedom of thought. This is really about freedom. The church wishes to curtail our freedom while others wish to experience it. Either way, you are way off topic now.

Tigerboy said...

Steven, GCT:

Don't let QOI drag you into some ridiculous comparison between the violence, hatred, and outright barbarism that drips from the pages of the Bible like a Mel Gibson movie, and the perfectly normal, healthy expression of human sexuality that is protected by the very Constitution of these United States.

If QOI freaks out over depictions of the human body, he must not have much appreciation for that which he believes "God hath wrought."

This is just ONE of the reasons why religious zealotry is so harmful in our society. It teachs people to be afraid of their own genitalia.

Hateful.

Tigerboy said...

QOI:

Since you chose to repeat your post about chemicals:

"It is pure nonsense to suggest that love can evolve! Fat iron sugar lime magnesium phosphorus potash and sulfur can't just accidentally formulate and evolve to produce loving actions!"

I will repost my response:

Love, respect for family members, pair-bonding, cooperation in child-rearing, cooperation with one's society, moral behavior, etc. . . . . these are EXCELLENT evolutionary strategies.

They lead to greater survival rates as surely as an opposable thumb.

I am so sorry that it is difficult for you to understand any of the science that has come up more recently than the Bronze Age.

I suggest you read a second book. It's called "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. It is even more enlightening than that literary bloodbath you enjoy so much.

Question of Identity said...

Richard Dawkins is not very well thought of in the science world - he is not a real scientist for one!

Talking about evolution - I note there is a new book out: 'Evolution for Dummies' it would be a little naughty to suggest that the title gets it about right! LOL (said with humour not really meant!)

When Darwin proposed his theory of evolution pushing 200 years ago he was convinced that future fossil discoveries would prove his theory to be true.


Darwin himself wrote:


"The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, [must] be truly enormous," he wrote. "Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory" (Darwin, pp. 260-261).


Given that there is in excess of over a million species today, we should be able to find hundreds of millions of examples of fossil evidence of ‘intermediate forms’ gradually evolving into other species. To date despite a comprehensive world wide search by geologists, the total evidence of intermediate forms is … zero.

There can be no surprise that more and more top scientists believe that Darwin's Theory is fundamentally flawed.

acidkoolaid said...

Oh Brother! All this debate/discussion about theory. All one has to do is open their eyes and see the hell on earth that exist and that is enough for any phosphorus/sugar ... brain to spark electrical/chemical impulses sufficient to question the notion of a just and loving god.

I don't know one single Christian who doesn't ask and can't answer "where was god when [fill in one of the multiple of bad things you've read about, seen happen to someone, or experienced yourself]?

Take for example, the guy in Colorado who, about 6 months ago, went to two different religious establishments and killed 4 or 5 people. I happened to be in church the day after the first shooting and the pastor had the congregation pray that the shooter be found and no one else be hurt (QOI - remember, where two or more are gathered?). Instead, what happened? He went into another church and killed himself and two more people.

WOW! God really listened! So either 1) he really doesn't exist, 2) he exist and his bible is a lie, 3) he exist and didn't even give a shit about people worshipping him. My pastor's response to this dilemma was "all we can be sure of is that 'god is'".

WHAT!? Is that the best chistians can do? I see that QOI didn't bother to even respond to the question I posed several days ago. I imagine that perhaps it was not theoretical enough and that in it sought answers to real life problems, all QOI would be able to muster would be "god is".

Question of Identity said...

Acid

There have been so many questions asked that I couldn't possibly pick up on all of them.

I note that you haven't tried to answer my question re evolution - guess you can't?????

Ape becoming man evolution is seen to be old hat by most top scientists.

Until you answer this there is no point going on with the discussion. I have to admit that there are some things I do not know the answer to and I will settle for you admitting your ignorance.

Praying for God's blessing upon you all.

acidkoolaid said...

QOI - I wasn't on the "ape" bandwagon. And "so many questions" came from you, too. Don't you think your "work" here is done?

Tigerboy said...

QOI:

"Richard Dawkins is not very well thought of in the science world - he is not a real scientist for one!"

Dr. Richard Dawkins
Education: 1962, Graduated from Balliol College, Oxford, England; 1966, M.A. and D.Phil., University of Oxford; 1989, D.Sc., University of Oxford

Current Position: Charles Simonyi Chair in the Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford.

Sounds like a scientist to me! Just because you say something doesn't make it true. This really gets to the crux of your confusion. Just because you SAY something DOESN'T make it true! Say it with me, now people! Just because you SAY something DOESN'T MAKE IT TRUE! (Can I get an "AMEN"?)

I notice that you totally avoided my point. You went from claiming moral behavior could never have an evolutionary explanation, to attacking Dr. Dawkins.

Even if there are flaws yet to be discovered in the Theory of Evolution, science will root them out. That's how the Scientific Method works. That is what peer-review is for. That is how scientific theories are developed. It does NOT mean that we all fall to our knees and sing "Jesus Loves Me, This I Know."

Let me ask you this: If your child developed cancer, would you beat your breast and light candles? Or, would you seek out a cancer specialist? Seriously. You sound like a breast-beater, candle-lighter. I'm worried about your kids.

Steven Bently said...

QOI: "Praying for God's blessing upon you all."

um, when will we know we have received god's blessing, and how will we know it came from a direct result of your actions?

Remember, neither the Bible god nor Jesus speaks english, the Bible has had to be translated over 1600 times, Jesus supossedly spoke Aramic, but never learned to speak english, so I'm afraid all that praying you've done in english is for naught.

What a nit!

Question of Identity said...

Poor effort so far to answer the major problem of the missing link for evolution!

'No hate here'

Well if blogging away in favour of a blog entitled 'Why I hate Jesus' isn't hate - I don't know what is.

Time now to brush dust off feet.

But I will still pray for you all.

Neil

acidkoolaid said...

QOI "dust his feet off" so I guess he was jesus. Are most the xians that visit here as arrogant as he? My guess is yes, as I've found them all to be "my way or the highway".

Steven Bently said...

The reason he's a pastor, he found out that he could manipulate people that want to believe as him, but he found out he could not manipulate anyone here.

pastor = manipulator - people -their money

Nelix said...

For the question concerning the intermediate fossils:http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates

Just passing by. Although you may want to be clear on what an Intermediate fossils is, or what kind of evidence your willing to accept for evolution.

Tigerboy said...

QOI:

"Poor effort so far to answer the major problem of the missing link for evolution!"

Showing a transition from one species, into another, is difficult. There are many reasons for this. Fossilized remains are rare things. There are distinct species of organisms that are known to us by only ONE SINGLE fossilized example! Now, you want a whole SERIES on a specific animal, PLUS a series on the animal it became.

Transitional fossils are not common, but your statement that there are none is a really good example of a Creationist telling a total lie.

I found pages and pages of examples. If you would like to read about it, Google either of these two names:

STEPHEN GOULD and/or KATHLEEN HUNT

From STEPHEN GOULD: "The supposed lack of intermediary forms in the fossil record remains the fundamental canard of current antievolutionism. Such transitional forms are sparse, to be sure, and for two sets of good reasons — geological (the gappiness of the fossil record) and biological (the episodic nature of evolutionary change, including patterns of punctuated equilibrium, and transition within small populations of limited geographic extent). But paleontologists have discovered several superb examples of intermediary forms and sequences, more than enough to convince any fair-minded skeptic about the reality of life’s physical genealogy."

CETACEANS (Whales and Dolphins):

It was not until 1979 that paleontologists had their first indisputable evidence about whale transition. Pakicetus was discovered by Philip Gingerich in Pakistan. Later, in 1995, Hans Thewissen found Ambulocetus. Whales with legs are now known from Pakistan, India, Egypt and the U.S.A.

It took less than 15 million years for the whale lineage to move from land, through shallow bays and coastal waters, to deep marine environments. By 40 million years ago whales had become essentially the animals we know today.

The evolution of whales involved much more than legs becoming flippers or vestigial organs. The fossil series demonstrates how their breathing apparatus changed, their ears changed and other body parts changed.

Whales did not turn into fish. Inside every flipper is found the bones of the mammalian hand. They swim like otters by undulating the mammalian spine. The tail fluke is not a fish fin. Evolution works by modifying existing body plans to fit new conditions of life, and is often constrained by developmental pathways. No longer limited by gravity and strength of bones, whales could become giants of the sea.

From KATHLEEN HUNT: "This is a set of numerous individual fossils that show a change between one species and another. It's a very fine-grained sequence documenting the actual speciation event, usually covering less than a million years. These species-to-species transitions are unmistakable when they are found. Throughout successive strata you see the population averages of teeth, feet, vertebrae, etc., changing from what is typical of the first species to what is typical of the next species. Sometimes, these sequences occur only in a limited geographic area (the place where the speciation actually occurred), with analyses from any other area showing an apparently "sudden" change. Other times, though, the transition can be seen over a very wide geological area. Many "species-to-species transitions" are known, mostly for marine invertebrates and recent mammals (both those groups tend to have good fossil records)."

TRANSITIONS FROM AMPHIBIANS TO AMNIOTES (First Reptiles):

Proterogyrinus or another early anthracosaur (late Mississippian) -- Classic labyrinthodont-amphibian skull and teeth, but with reptilian vertebrae, pelvis, humerus, and digits. Still has fish skull hinge. Amphibian ankle. 5-toed hand and a 2-3-4-5-3 (almost reptilian) phalangeal count.

Limnoscelis, Tseajaia (late Carboniferous) -- Amphibians apparently derived from the early anthracosaurs, but with additional reptilian features: structure of braincase, reptilian jaw muscle, expanded neural arches.

Solenodonsaurus (mid-Pennsylvanian) -- An incomplete fossil, apparently between the anthracosaurs and the cotylosaurs. Loss of palatal fangs, loss of lateral line on head, etc. Still just a single sacral vertebra, though.

Hylonomus, Paleothyris (early Pennsylvanian) -- These are protorothyrids, very early cotylosaurs (primitive reptiles). They were quite little, lizard-sized animals with amphibian-like skulls (amphibian pineal opening, dermal bone, etc.), shoulder, pelvis, & limbs, and intermediate teeth and vertebrae. Rest of skeleton reptilian, with reptilian jaw muscle, no palatal fangs, and spool-shaped vertebral centra. Probably no eardrum yet. Many of these new "reptilian" features are also seen in little amphibians (which also sometimes have direct-developing eggs laid on land), so perhaps these features just came along with the small body size of the first reptiles.

PRIMATES (Apes, Monkeys, and Humans):

Australopithecus ramidus (mid-Pliocene, 4.4 Ma) -- A recently discovered very early hominid (or early chimp?), from just after the split with the apes. Not well known. Possibly bipedal (only the skull was found). Teeth both apelike and humanlike; one baby tooth is very chimp-like. (White et al., 1994; Wood 1994)

Australopithecus afarensis (late Pliocene, 3.9 Ma) -- Some excellent fossils ("Lucy", etc.) make clear that this was fully bipedal and definitely a hominid. But it was an extremely ape-like hominid; only four feet tall, still had an ape-sized brain of just 375-500 cc (finally answering the question of which came first, large brain or bipedality) and ape-like teeth. This lineage gradually split into a husky large-toothed lineage and a more slender, smaller- toothed lineage. The husky lineage (A. robustus, A. boisei) eventually went extinct.

Australopithecus africanus (later Pliocene, 3.0 Ma) -- The more slender lineage. Up to five feet tall, with slightly larger brain (430-550 cc) and smaller incisors. Teeth gradually became more and more like Homo teeth. These hominds are almost perfect ape- human intermediates, and it's now pretty clear that the slender australopithecines led to the first Homo species.

Homo habilis (latest Pliocene/earliest Pleistocene, 2.5 Ma) -- Straddles the boundary between australopithecines and humans, such that it's sometimes lumped with the australopithecines. About five feet tall, face still primitive but projects less, molars smaller. Brain 500-800 cc, overlapping australopithecines at the low end and and early Homo erectus at the high end. Capable of rudimentary speech? First clumsy stone tools.

Homo erectus (incl. "Java Man", "Peking Man", "Heidelberg Man"; Pleist., 1.8 Ma) -- Looking much more human now with a brain of 775-1225 cc, but still has thick brow ridges & no chin. Spread out of Africa & across Europe and Asia. Good tools, first fire.

Archaic Homo sapiens (Pleistocene, 500,000 yrs ago) -- These first primitive humans were perfectly intermediate between H. erectus and modern humans, with a brain of 1200 cc and less robust skeleton & teeth. Over the next 300,000 years, brain gradually increased, molars got still smaller, skeleton less muscular. Clearly arose from H erectus, but there are continuing arguments about where this happened.

One famous offshoot group, the Neandertals, developed in Europe 125,000 years ago. They are considered to be the same species as us, but a different subspecies, H. sapiens neandertalensis. They were more muscular, with a slightly larger brain of 1450 cc, a distinctive brow ridge, and differently shaped throat (possibly limiting their language?). They are known to have buried their dead.

H. sapiens sapiens (incl. "Cro-magnons"; late Pleist., 40,000 yrs ago) -- All modern humans. Average brain size 1350 cc. In Europe, gradually supplanted the Neanderthals.

Transitional fossils. There you go.

Solaris Roscita said...

To this "Question Of Identity" character:

Jesus fucking christ-balls man! Every week there is this publication called "New Scientist" where you can learn all kinds of marvellous things about science that you clearly are completely in the dark about. Recently in fact, they had an expose on this "lack of transitional fossils" that you speak of. In fact, there are now tens of thousands of transitional fossils - when Charles Darwin wrote that, archaeology/paleontology had barely started up!

There is another really great weekly publication called "American Scientific" that I highly suggest you read. Both magazines are educational, and have no "lewd sexual content" or whatever paralysis bug is up your arse concerning that strain of human behaviour, so I'm sure you will enjoy reading them.

Question of Identity said...

If your hospitality is typical of humanity - to those who come on this sight than believe me - the world is in need of a Saviour!

Your treatment of those who disagree with you is inhumane. I will not be looking up this site ever again. But I will once again pray for you all!!

My prayer is that you loose some of that anger inside you that seems to be so communal here.

May God bless you and in doing so change you.

Neil

Question of Identity said...

Last comment on evolution: If there are so many intermediate forms - why are there more and more scientists who are denying Darwin's theory based on the fact that there are no credible intermediate forms???

Steven Bently said...

Typical fundy response, yeah go hide under jesus' dress where it is safe and secure from reality.

Who cares about evolution, it makes more sense than a boat floating around for a year, built by a 600 year old drunkard.

Nelix said...

I have a hypothesis for the increase of "creation scientists".

It goes something like this, It's became easier for fundamentalists to became scientists as Religious colleges like the one which taught Kent Hovind expect less scientifically valid answers in exams for science degrees.

And Neil, you weren't really nice to anyone else either. Personally I thought you were polarizing the debate, by claiming your were bringing a message of love, other than your/Bible opinions.

GCT said...

QOI,
"Last comment on evolution: If there are so many intermediate forms - why are there more and more scientists who are denying Darwin's theory based on the fact that there are no credible intermediate forms???"

This is simply false propaganda. I'd like you to name some of these top scientists...biologists would be especially welcome.

"If your hospitality is typical of humanity - to those who come on this sight than believe me - the world is in need of a Saviour!"

Considering that it's my thread, I believe I've been rather hospitable.

"Your treatment of those who disagree with you is inhumane."

I fail to see what is inhumane about pointing out where you are factually wrong.

"My prayer is that you loose some of that anger inside you that seems to be so communal here."

What anger is this that you keep harping on and on about? I'm not angry, and I find your use of the stereotype of the angry atheist to be rather bigoted.

"May God bless you and in doing so change you."

Wouldn't that violate my free will?

igod said...

>A Christian would never force you to become a Christian - you have freedom of choice.<

Yeah, I'm sure Torquemada lived by that creed.

Anonymous said...

Those who do not believe in Jesus Christ are really, really, really ignorant. Where do you think you will go when you die? You do not doubt your God and Lord. And you do not question him. You need to accept that some people won't believe and others will. You don't need to be mean to people that do believe and others who don't. You can have you can decide. Why do you persecute people? Why can't everyone be just nice and get along? Why can't you just figure it out on your own? How are you sure he's not real? Just because you can't see 1 million dollars doesn't mean it doesn't exist? We are all created in the image of God and he cares about all of us. Even when we are horrible people, he may get mad , but he forgives you.

GCT said...

"Those who do not believe in Jesus Christ are really, really, really ignorant."

Evidence of god please?

"Where do you think you will go when you die?"

Nowhere. What makes you think that something will happen after you die? Do you have evidence for this? Do you have evidence for a soul?

"You do not doubt your God and Lord. And you do not question him."

Why not? What is god so afraid of that he won't allow questions?

"You need to accept that some people won't believe and others will."

Believe what you want, but don't force it on me, don't expect me to go along with it, and don't expect those beliefs to be immune to criticism.

"You don't need to be mean to people that do believe and others who don't."

Who is being mean?

"You can have you can decide."

Have what and decide what?

"Why do you persecute people?"

This is simply laughable. Who am I persecuting?

"Why can't everyone be just nice and get along?"

I have no problem getting along with others until they try to usurp my rights or press their illogical opinions on me.

"Why can't you just figure it out on your own?"

I did.

"How are you sure he's not real?"

How are you sure Allah isn't real?

"We are all created in the image of God and he cares about all of us."

That's doubtful considering all the horrible things that god does to us, as talked about in many of the posts on this site.

"Even when we are horrible people, he may get mad , but he forgives you."

Why should a perfect being get mad, especially since he would know well ahead of time that I would do something "bad." He should have been prepared for it from the beginning of time, yet he still gets mad? Do you understand how absurd that idea is? And, I'm sure that he's got lots of forgiveness for those (most of humanity according to the Bible) who are burning and will burn in hell for eternity, right? Again, this is simply absurd.