Ban the internet
- Started
- Last post
- 174 Responses
- discipler0
"like all the jesus pushers driving SUVs with support our troop magnets on them, though positive in message, its contradictive in reality
version3
(May 19 05, 11:52)"
------------------------------You have a caricature of Christians. This is an error that's so prevalent in the west.
- discipler0
A shame Tick ignores people he disagrees with rather than opting for objective discussion.
First of all, Creation science is science. Just not science which stems from an Atheistic/Naturalist world view. Rather it is science which recognizes that where there is complex design, there must be a designer. Again, Intelligent Design and Creationism is not about illegitimately imposing the dictates of faith upon science, but about raising rational objections to proposed Darwinian explanations of the biological world.
Yes, the ID crowd says, "God created everything." Why? Because there is an abundance of evidence which points to an intelligent designer behind the universe. Look at the structure of human eye, a human egg, the perfect distance of the earth from the sun and the moon from the earth, etc... What honest seekers need to learn about is such biochemical marvels as the clotting cascade, the chemistry of vision, the bacterial flagellum, and countless others, and decide which hypothesis better explains what is observed, random evolution or Intelligent Design. If you suggest that matter just sprang from nothing... you still have to answer the question - who/what caused this? An infinite series of causes? No, that just leaves you with an infinite series of effects which is logical suicide.
Physical sciences can only account for physical processes. It cannot account for metaphysical realities like the will and emotions, the ability to love and feel compassion.
And much of what is considered "Enlightenment" is really the result of bad science. We've grown, we need to revise and look at the real problems with the Darwinian framework.
- discipler0
Tick, thanks for using the "nads" laymans term. It's all clear now.
The problem with assuming that any species mutates from one genome to another is that there is no scientific evidence.
Those who vehemently adhere to an evolutionary model for origins do so without bothering to either take a hard look at some of evolution's assumptions, or to wrestle with the real problems that it faces. They have accepted evolution on the basis of authority, because their professors or academic gurus told them so - a kind of faith... a kind of religion.
No scientist has ever seen a dog become something other than a dog, or vice-versa. Nor does the fossil record suggest this. Louis Pasteur's famous observation, that life only comes from life, has never been disproved. His experiments have already falsified all claims that life originated from primordial goo, but philosophical considerations - not facts, not science - prevent this from being accepted by evolutionists. So, which model of origins requires more faith?
Tick, there's a bit more to the Bible than a good story about the human condition. ;)
- mrdobolina0
discipler, don't want to respond to anything I have said about the hundreds, if not thousands of people who thought they saw the virgin mary on that overpass in chicago?
- version30
im in kansas right now saying that and i speak from experience i see it everyday on the street.
its real, not a misconception
- mrdobolina0
I see it here too in milwaukee.
- thenuge0
she is a texan
- moural0
Posting in these threads is a waste of time, but since I have time today...
If you guys read two books with two different opinions, the one you agree with would be wonderful, while the one you disagree with is utter crap, no matter the writing or research. I swear, for as many liberals are here, you people sure are close-minded.
While I generally disdain discipler for his evangelical attempts and mono-thread postings, he does have a point. Whenever he posts, it's "you're an idiot, stop believing that crap". Because your 7th grade teacher told you, or your wonderful new national Geographic said so, he's wrong? Both of you need to stop being so rooted in your Christian or Anti-Christian ways. You don't have to be an atheist to be an intellectual, but it sure as hell seems like you have to be atheist to be a smartass.
Get off your high horse, because with the posts in these threads, none of you make a very convincing argument for the intellect of the human being.
- discipler0
version3, there are plenty of agnostics who drive SUV's and live in suburbia as well. It doesn't have a bearing on one's world view per se.
- TheTick0
Dammit. I didn't want to post here anymore. You're going to make me unignore Discpler just to get my afternoon jollies. Damn you all to your respective hells. (secular and sacred)
- uberdesigner0
I'd sign it
- spifflink0
being christain doesnt garner YOU mush credibility
- TheTick0
The second Dark Age is upon us all...
- version30
discipler, maybe you are missing the point.
support our troops while i pay $2.15 a gallon for my escalade's 6mpg so i can drive to the grocery store and hairdressers
irony anyone??????????????
- Lesk0
join my clan quick.
I already have yas first task, who can guess.
- BonSeff0
they are from texas? no way!
- Lesk0
seriously not thinkin in going back to the US, getting me confused with jesus will cause in be getting raped, and getting confused with satan burned.
damn.
- sparker0
ban my nuts.
- SteveJobs0
the ideas of the church of the subgenius are not that of popular opinion/ideals, therefore the would be overlooked in favor of popular models.
forget about what you believe or don't believe in. the fact that children are taught one belief is what should concern you.
and by the sound of it, the only thing most of you were taught was sarcasm, closed-mindedness and disbelief.
carry on.
- TheTick0
He dosn't think catholics are christian. Thanks.
My Jesus is older than your Jesus. Nah-na-na-na-na-Nah