Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
This is interesting, as it is not what I have seen in real life. The people I personally know who have converted to a particular religion tend to be fairly gung ho. It seems to be an almost instantaneous conversion. On the other hand, most people I know who admit to atheism (generally in private, rarely in public), tend to have moved towards this admission slowly. It seems to be more difficult to release a religious belief than to gain one. It would be educational to see how both the atheists and theists on this thread have come to their conclusions.
Me, I was one of the slow conversions to atheism. I may still have a few agnostic remnants, but they don't bother me as much as they used to.
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
I'm not sure if this was directed at me, but I am actually very confident in my personal beliefs. They don't match yours, but they have been worked out over more years than I would care to admit publicly.
They work for me and the people around me, my husband included (at least I haven't had any complaints yet). If I have made an incorrect decision, I am willing to accept that and any consequences. Although personally, I don't think there will be any.SezMe says,
Are you?
Last edited:
Prove all things; hold fast to that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil
RationalReverend
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2007
- Messages
- 278
Someone else asked if he/she had meant the story or the poem and at the point that I had last checked she had not answered. I stopped following it. No big deal. You can try to make something of it if you want, knock yourself out sweetheart.
bignickel
Mad Mod Poet God
When you use your brain like this, do people nearby hear the sound of grinding gears?
On a page on Jack Chick's website there was a link to an essay http://www.chick.com/bc/1994/beetle.asp?wpc=beetle.asp&wpp=a about the bombardier beetle. The essay claimed that the bombardier beetle couldn't have evolved because it would have blown itself up in the process.
But if someone explained a series of changes by which the bombardier beetle could have evolved another beetle or insect, I suppose they would dismiss it as microevolution.
But if someone explained a series of changes by which the bombardier beetle could have evolved another beetle or insect, I suppose they would dismiss it as microevolution.
autumn1971
Illuminator
Remember, microevoloution is only that incontrovertible evidence that proves evoloutionary theory. Macroevoloution is posited by the creationists as unproven, even though transitions have been shown which demonstrate evoloution very nicely.
My question is always, "define a boundary between micro and macro evoloution, and allow it to be studied."
No creationist will ever define such a boundry because it would open them up to scientific inquiruy.
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 28,828
Yes, I am willing to wager my immortal soul that the hell described in the Bible does not exist.
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 28,828
I have heard many creationists say that the boundry is quite clear. If you start with a dog, you end with a dog; if you start with a cat you end with a cat.
In scientific terms they would believe change at the family level or above is not possible, but change at the species or genus level is possible.
Their position could also be summed up as any evolution that can be observed by breeding is micro-evolution, while any evolution that requires interpreting fossils is macro.
Of course, once they start with the premise that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, then they must reject all evidence that shows that life evolved over hundreds of millions of years.
Last edited:
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 28,828
The original resolution dealt with how certain words in the Bible were translated incorrectly and ended up being used as a basis for anti-semetism. The link you provided is from a fundamentalist group that believes the KJV is the most perfect translation and thus cannot contain errors. It is not a reliable source for what was discussed at the Episcopol General Assembly.
SimonD
Rouge Element
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 1,092
I think Blutasky made a good point too. However, Zep also made a valid point. I have never heard, read or seen (on TV of course) of a body behaving in such a fashion after been hung
You people crack me up so worried about the small things.
Step outside of the box once and see if there is anything to it.
Too much pride I guess?
How to Develop Your Sense of Humor
Edge, The small stuff is just as important as the big stuff in the Bible. You believe that everything in the Bible is true and inspired by God. Therefore, nothing in it can be wrong. However, you cannot escape the fact that the book was writen by humans and as we all know humans make mistakes. Also, you cannot expect humans living thousands of years ago to have the same idea about how the world works, that we do today.
The biggest problem is that, all it takes is for one nutter to quote one phrase from the Bible and you can end up with justifying murder, rape incest, genocide, slavery and the list goes on.
How can God allow the wholesale massacre of mankind (the flood), but then give a commandment, "thou shall not kill"? I do not find the argument, "because he is God" to be valid. He is not much of a leader if he won't follow his own rules.
The Bible in the wrong hands can be a weapon of mass distruction and God does nothing to stop or prevent it.
Would you go into a battle against an emeny if your captain was to say "Well guys, this is the way to do things, but it's up to you, good luck". This may not be the best example, but you get the idea of what I am driving at.
It's not a matter of pride or not having a sense of humur, it's a matter of thinking for yourself, using thousands of years of evidence, instead of relying on a book writen by ignorant people (I don't mean ignorant in a derogatory sense), which contradicts itself on more then one occassion
God good to all, or just a few?
PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.
JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.
War or Peace?
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." – Voltaire.
If God created the world and all that is in it, then he must have created the Australian Aborigines to believe in the dreamtime.
SimonD
Rouge Element
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 1,092
Still being rude (sexist now)
Blutarsky
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2006
- Messages
- 272
Blutarsky
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2006
- Messages
- 272
Ossai. Are you really that childish? Can we not discuss the topic without the insults, it really detracts from your points.
We have no problem comprehending the question. FYI, you should look up what a strawman really is.
You are simply reading too much into the text in Acts. Acts does NOT specify the modus of death. It does NOT say he was disembowled by anything, or that the disembowlment was the cause of death...
Could you please explain how falling headlong causes one's intestines to fall out in the absence of other aggrivating circumstances?
Blutarsky
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2006
- Messages
- 272
Let translate using my Bulls**t to English dictionary:
I simply can't respond with anything substantive so I'll mask my failure with a personal attack.
Any other childish remarks or do you have something of substance to add to the conversation? You people wonder why no one wants to engage in debate around here...
Blutarsky
I take it by your continued inability to answer the question, that I and probably some other posters are on ignore, or you realize that you can’t logically answer the question so you continue ignoring it. Either way, the contradictions remain unanswered and your credibility continues to plummet.
Ossai
Could you get over the strawman , and actually focus on the actual question?
I take it by your continued inability to answer the question, that I and probably some other posters are on ignore, or you realize that you can’t logically answer the question so you continue ignoring it. Either way, the contradictions remain unanswered and your credibility continues to plummet.
Ossai