Jump to content


Photo

Evolution Just Doesn't Make Sense


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
180 replies to this topic

#61 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,185 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:17 AM

No, people of all faiths and philosophies have made great contributions to science. You use arabic numerals and math developed in the islamic world to describe the distance between planets named for the greek gods, for instance.

Not quite, the "arabic figures" arabs actually picked up in india. And the math stems from Greece, Islamic Arabs just had access to this as they occupied previously Christian areas of the Eastern Roman Empire.

Sure science uses math and does also use recorded facts like on the planets. But the scientific revolution was mainly concerned with understanding how nature works. And yes, science was predominantly developed by Christian Creationists. Atheists, materialists and agnostics just started to climb in this bus far later, when people had kind of forgotten about the origins. Today they like to claim that there is a contradiction between faith and science, which is a false claim.
  • gilbo12345 and Nash like this

#62 Nash

Nash

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 30
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Harare

Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:07 AM

To those of the same mind as me (creationists), let me just try to calm you minds by making you realize that you don't have to try and defend the word of God from science as if science is inherently evil.
Let me give you a very SICK joke. A guy goes to his father and says dad, i want to marry your mother. The father says why would you do that and the son said because you married my mother.
now to this guy it was logical that if his father can marry his mother then that's evidence that he should be allowed to marry his. Now that's obviously sick and doesn't make sense at all, but how many times have you seen some scientists make crazy conclusions from any given sort of data? "Because everything can out of nothing then there is no need for a creator". that's just absurd, yet do some hold this belief to almost delusional proportions.
These guys don't follow the evidence to wherever it leads, they have a destination already and everything must lead there!
Now don't be afraid of those scenarios in the bible that contradict science. As an example, science tells us that continents moved apart over millions of years yet the bible tells us it happened faster! Genesis 10:25
And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided
this obviously contradicts the thousands of years science proposes so who are we to believe? Given that the bible was not written as a response to skeptics or as an alternative to science we can safely conclude that it simply recorded what happened. Whether you chose not to believe it is immaterial. We can find many events in the bible that make it hard to apply the current observable laws to things in the bible thereby creating the controversies but as i said, that's no reason not to believe the bible because the people who wrote were just recording what had happened unlike nowadays when even what i'm writing is a response to what I've heard. So according to the law of first mention we can safely take what the word says because we know that it is within the real of the Almighty God to do it anyway!

#63 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:59 AM

To make things easier, perhaps you should explain what "claim" and what "argument" you are talking about.

"Cows, horses and rabbits were, and are, running around around when coelacanths were, and are, existing, and yet they don't seem to appear in the same layer."

And your argument is that rabbits do not fossilize because they have a different environment than sea creatures. Which is silly since rabbits do fossilize and we have 55 million year old rabbit skeletons.

#64 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:07 AM

Or c) you don't understand what the verse is saying... or perhaps even d) that I have missunderstood what you are saying... but it seems to me you think the verse in question claims that everyone on earth will be able to see Jesus' "touchdown" (which howeverpossible given today's technology).

Here is the verse in question:

"And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."

So what does the size or shape of the earth have to do with everyone being to see something occurring in the clouds of heaven?

I listed several possible interpretations, some in-line with jesus being infallible, others not in line with it and concluded that any interpretation would be speculative and that I could not know for certain what the passage meant or whether it was evidence for or against a particular worldview... So you cherry-pick out one intrepretation and argue against it derisively as though I asserted it as the "true" interpretation.

I'm getting really sick of people on this forum arguing against things I haven't said, have said the exact opposite of, or obnoxiously shoving in my face like I'm an idiot something I just pointed out (politely) to them.

Does anybody actually READ what an atheist says on this forum? Or just glance at it and then proceed to attack the atheist.

#65 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:10 AM

What it says?

What it means?

Please explain how you think you know what it says and what it means without the use of interpretation!

This should be interesting...

I can't, and neither can you. That was my entire point. Stop obnoxiously repeating what I said back to me and pretending it's a "gotcha".

#66 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,000 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:25 AM

I listed several possible interpretations, some in-line with jesus being infallible, others not in line with it and concluded that any interpretation would be speculative and that I could not know for certain what the passage meant or whether it was evidence for or against a particular worldview... So you cherry-pick out one intrepretation and argue against it derisively as though I asserted it as the "true" interpretation.

I'm getting really sick of people on this forum arguing against things I haven't said, have said the exact opposite of, or obnoxiously shoving in my face like I'm an idiot something I just pointed out (politely) to them.

Does anybody actually READ what an atheist says on this forum? Or just glance at it and then proceed to attack the atheist.


You haven't responded to Uppsala's post, which was a good one IMHO.

You stated that the Bible supports flat earth claims
You cited this passage as support of this
Uppsala has shown you were it has no bearing on the size / shape of the Earth at all
You respond by whinging

#67 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:29 AM

He's describing the end of the world, which interestingly he says will happen "within one generation", but that's another debate.


The typical skeptic attack upon scripture that was answered centuries ago.

But this is what Jesus actually said:

Mt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Mr 13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
Lu 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

And the Greek translation goes like this: Verily <amen> I say <lego> unto you <humin>, <hoti> This <houtos> generation <genea> shall <parerchomai> not <ou me> pass away <parerchomai>, <an> till <heos> all <pas> be fulfilled <ginomai>.

It is but common coloquial expression in both writing and speech giving to refer to 'this generation' as (1) the present time/present age, or (2) to a yet future generation which was being spoken of in the first place. Almost everyone uses such expressions when it is appropriate to do so, i.e. "This group of people is going to experience the matter before this(pointing to a time line) time from is overwith." Posted Image

The same is true of the charge that the Bible speaks of a 'flat earth' which is absurd. Why? Because millions of people have heard, for example, sports commentators at the Olympics speak of all the 'athletes who have come here from the four corners of the earth'...yet no one believes that the commentator is believing in nor promoting a flat earth!

The skeptic, from the sinful prejudice of his/her heart does not want to grant to the Holy Spirit the same liberty of grammatical expression that he/she uses when the occasion arises. They only wish to throw stones at what they refuse to believe in: the Creator God who made all things.

#68 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:29 AM

"Not quite, the "arabic figures" arabs actually picked up in india."

So christianity came from india then? If not my point still stands.

"And the math stems from Greece, Islamic Arabs just had access to this as they occupied previously Christian areas of the Eastern Roman Empire."

And many things christians had came from roman conquest. This is like saying "americans are better than europeans because we invented the airplane!" When we were european before we were american and that knowledge surely was useful in getting us to that point. It's all one big mixing pot. No one culture invented everything that got to it's current point. Christians didn't invent writing or fire or the wheel or irrigation etc, etc. To claim one religious or ethnic group has been superior to all others from the beginning of time is not really the most productive or logical position to take, and historically leads to lots of people getting killed.

"Sure science uses math and does also use recorded facts like on the planets. But the scientific revolution was mainly concerned with understanding how nature works. And yes, science was predominantly developed by Christian Creationists. Atheists, materialists and agnostics just started to climb in this bus far later, when people had kind of forgotten about the origins."

Atheism, deism etc have existed at least since the days of ancient greece which were the beginnings of what we would call "science".

http://en.wikipedia....tory_of_atheism

The "problem of evil" argument against theism comes from epicurus who was born in 341 BC. The idea that atheism is some new fad is just revisionist history. The truth is that for most of the history of theism you were not legally allowed to openly be an atheist. But there are still records of atheist thought from virtually every era.

"Today they like to claim that there is a contradiction between faith and science, which is a false claim."

I see this claim made much more often by creationists intend on demonizing science. Atheists tend to say there is a conflict between fundamentalism and science, which of course there is. Just as there is a conflict between flat-eartherism and science. Or science and anything that goes against what can be observed and empirically tested.

#69 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,000 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:36 AM

Might I ask you Agnophilo to use the quote function of this forum, it allows for easier reading as well as increased posterity
  • agnophilo123 likes this

#70 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:41 AM

"To those of the same mind as me (creationists), let me just try to calm you minds by making you realize that you don't have to try and defend the word of God from science as if science is inherently evil."

You then demonize scientists.

"Let me give you a very SICK joke. A guy goes to his father and says dad, i want to marry your mother. The father says why would you do that and the son said because you married my mother.
now to this guy it was logical that if his father can marry his mother then that's evidence that he should be allowed to marry his. Now that's obviously sick and doesn't make sense at all, but how many times have you seen some scientists make crazy conclusions from any given sort of data?"

Not often.

"Because everything can out of nothing then there is no need for a creator". that's just absurd, yet do some hold this belief to almost delusional proportions."

And that's an evangelical strawman, not what atheists or scientists generally say.

"These guys don't follow the evidence to wherever it leads, they have a destination already and everything must lead there!
Now don't be afraid of those scenarios in the bible that contradict science. As an example, science tells us that continents moved apart over millions of years yet the bible tells us it happened faster! Genesis 10:25
And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided"

No, that's how you interpret it, not what it explicitly says.

"this obviously contradicts the thousands of years science proposes so who are we to believe?"

You get that continents are moving as we speak, right?

"Given that the bible was not written as a response to skeptics or as an alternative to science we can safely conclude that it simply recorded what happened."

The book of genesis was written by people who did not see what happened. It wasn't written by adam or eve, it was recorded from oral tradition about 2900 years ago by unknown authors around 3,000 years after the events supposedly took place. Why trust anonymous authors repeating claims from other anonymous people over empirical evidence? And they recorded two versions of the creation account because there were several floating around at the time. Genesis 1 and 2 give two different orders for creation. Are they both infallible? How does that work?

"Whether you chose not to believe it is immaterial."

Then why are you here?

"We can find many events in the bible that make it hard to apply the current observable laws to things in the bible thereby creating the controversies but as i said, that's no reason not to believe the bible because the people who wrote were just recording what had happened unlike nowadays when even what i'm writing is a response to what I've heard. So according to the law of first mention we can safely take what the word says because we know that it is within the real of the Almighty God to do it anyway!"

The people who wrote this stuff down weren't alive when these events supposedly happened even according to the bible. That makes no sense. And if we should trust people to be telling the truth, why not trust the authors of the holy books of other religions who were "just recording what happened"?

#71 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:44 AM

"You haven't responded to Uppsala's post, which was a good one IMHO."

Yes I have, and no it wasn't.

"You stated that the Bible supports flat earth claims
You cited this passage as support of this"

No, I didn't. I stated that some fundamentalists interpret it that way and that some passages can be interpreted either as indicating a flat earth or a myriad of other ways.

"Uppsala has shown you were it has no bearing on the size / shape of the Earth at all
You respond by whinging"

No, I was having a pleasant conversation about all of the many ways a passage can be interpreted and he responded by pretending I was saying something I didn't and whining about it. Just like you are.

#72 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,000 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:46 AM

I listed several possible interpretations, some in-line with jesus being infallible, others not in line with it and concluded that any interpretation would be speculative and that I could not know for certain what the passage meant or whether it was evidence for or against a particular worldview... So you cherry-pick out one intrepretation and argue against it derisively as though I asserted it as the "true" interpretation.

I'm getting really sick of people on this forum arguing against things I haven't said, have said the exact opposite of, or obnoxiously shoving in my face like I'm an idiot something I just pointed out (politely) to them.

Does anybody actually READ what an atheist says on this forum? Or just glance at it and then proceed to attack the atheist.


This

#73 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:55 AM

"It is but common coloquial expression in both writing and speech giving to refer to 'this generation' as (1) the present time/present age, or (2) to a yet future generation which was being spoken of in the first place. Almost everyone uses such expressions when it is appropriate to do so, i.e. "This group of people is going to experience the matter before this(pointing to a time line) time from is overwith."

I would agree that this is a reasonable interpretation but for the fact that scripture (at least the english translations) seem to suggest often that the end of the world was going to happen very soon. Two chapters later for instance jesus is quoted as saying:

"Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." (matthew 16:28). Though this could be interpreted or translated other ways as well and is in a less apocalyptic context. 1 john 2:18 says "Little children, it is the last time: and as you have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; by which we know that it is the last time."

I'm open to the possibility that these are bad translations or could be interpreted differently - are you open to the possibility that they meant that the world would end 2,000 years ago and are wrong?

"The same is true of the charge that the Bible speaks of a 'flat earth' which is absurd. Why? Because millions of people have heard, for example, sports commentators at the Olympics speak of all the 'athletes who have come here from the four corners of the earth'...yet no one believes that the commentator is believing in nor promoting a flat earth! The skeptic, from the sinful prejudice of his/her heart does not want to grant to the Holy Spirit the same liberty of grammatical expression that he/she uses when the occasion arises. They only wish to throw stones at what they refuse to believe in: the Creator God who made all things."

If you can disagree without making bigotted generalizations about non-believers I would appreciate it. And I have not argued that the bible says the earth is round, I just mentioned that some christians think so and talked about some of the passages they cite.

#74 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:56 AM

This


He is accusing us of the very things he is doing.

#75 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:57 AM

Might I ask you Agnophilo to use the quote function of this forum, it allows for easier reading as well as increased posterity

I do use the quote function unless I'm giving an in-line response in which case regular quotes are easier. I'm not used to the forum html.

#76 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 13 November 2012 - 09:06 AM

agnophilo:

You quoted me saying, "It is but common coloquial expression in both writing and speech giving to refer to 'this generation' as (1) the present time/present age, or (2) to a yet future generation which was being spoken of in the first place. Almost everyone uses such expressions when it is appropriate to do so, i.e. "This group of people is going to experience the matter before this(pointing to a time line) time from is overwith."

I would agree that this is a reasonable interpretation but for the fact that scripture (at least the english translations) seem to suggest often that the end of the world was going to happen very soon. Two chapters later for instance jesus is quoted as saying:

"Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." (matthew 16:28). Though this could be interpreted or translated other ways as well and is in a less apocalyptic context. 1 john 2:18 says "Little children, it is the last time: and as you have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; by which we know that it is the last time."


You forgot about the apostle John (ahem, the book of Revelation he wrote was a vision of the WHOLE end times). And just who else Jesus was referring to who was enabled to see the entire scope of fulfilled prophecy we will only learn about in heaven. It is my hope that you will be there despite our present differences.

I'm open to the possibility that these are bad translations or could be interpreted differently - are you open to the possibility that they meant that the world would end 2,000 years ago and are wrong?


No. As I told you before, God doesn't make mistakes. Skeptics make mistakes. God did not fail to communicate the truth about our world and life in it, nor of the end of the age; it is just that skeptics like yourself don't trust Him.

You quoted me saying, "The same is true of the charge that the Bible speaks of a 'flat earth' which is absurd. Why? Because millions of people have heard, for example, sports commentators at the Olympics speak of all the 'athletes who have come here from the four corners of the earth'...yet no one believes that the commentator is believing in nor promoting a flat earth! The skeptic, from the sinful prejudice of his/her heart does not want to grant to the Holy Spirit the same liberty of grammatical expression that he/she uses when the occasion arises. They only wish to throw stones at what they refuse to believe in: the Creator God who made all things."

If you can disagree without making bigotted generalizations about non-believers I would appreciate it. And I have not argued that the bible says the earth is round, I just mentioned that some christians think so and talked about some of the passages they cite.


Truthful generalizations...not bigoted ones. The issue on this point is the atheist common popular claim that the 'earth is flat'...not that the earth is round. That is, pardon the pun, the other side of the coin.

#77 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 09:07 AM

The typical skeptic attack upon scripture that was answered centuries ago.

But this is what Jesus actually said:

Mt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Mr 13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
Lu 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

And the Greek translation goes like this: Verily <amen> I say <lego> unto you <humin>, <hoti> This <houtos> generation <genea> shall <parerchomai> not <ou me> pass away <parerchomai>, <an> till <heos> all <pas> be fulfilled <ginomai>.

It is but common coloquial expression in both writing and speech giving to refer to 'this generation' as (1) the present time/present age, or (2) to a yet future generation which was being spoken of in the first place. Almost everyone uses such expressions when it is appropriate to do so, i.e. "This group of people is going to experience the matter before this(pointing to a time line) time from is overwith." Posted Image

The same is true of the charge that the Bible speaks of a 'flat earth' which is absurd. Why? Because millions of people have heard, for example, sports commentators at the Olympics speak of all the 'athletes who have come here from the four corners of the earth'...yet no one believes that the commentator is believing in nor promoting a flat earth!

The skeptic, from the sinful prejudice of his/her heart does not want to grant to the Holy Spirit the same liberty of grammatical expression that he/she uses when the occasion arises. They only wish to throw stones at what they refuse to believe in: the Creator God who made all things.

The typical skeptic attack upon scripture that was answered centuries ago.

But this is what Jesus actually said:

Mt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Mr 13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
Lu 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

And the Greek translation goes like this: Verily <amen> I say <lego> unto you <humin>, <hoti> This <houtos> generation <genea> shall <parerchomai> not <ou me> pass away <parerchomai>, <an> till <heos> all <pas> be fulfilled <ginomai>.

It is but common coloquial expression in both writing and speech giving to refer to 'this generation' as (1) the present time/present age, or (2) to a yet future generation which was being spoken of in the first place. Almost everyone uses such expressions when it is appropriate to do so, i.e. "This group of people is going to experience the matter before this(pointing to a time line) time from is overwith." Posted Image

The same is true of the charge that the Bible speaks of a 'flat earth' which is absurd. Why? Because millions of people have heard, for example, sports commentators at the Olympics speak of all the 'athletes who have come here from the four corners of the earth'...yet no one believes that the commentator is believing in nor promoting a flat earth!

The skeptic, from the sinful prejudice of his/her heart does not want to grant to the Holy Spirit the same liberty of grammatical expression that he/she uses when the occasion arises. They only wish to throw stones at what they refuse to believe in: the Creator God who made all things.

Upon reviewing the text it occurs to me that jesus says "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake." which christians often take as a fulfilled prophecy about the persecution of the apostles. Do you not take it that way? Since, if it is, it would make their generation "this" generation. He also tells them (seemingly personally) not to be deceived by false prophets etc. This can be interpreted different ways, but if I heard someone say to me "don't let x politician fool you" I wouldn't take it as "don't let x politician fool your decendants from 2,000+ years from now". That, to me, is a big stretch.

#78 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,000 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 13 November 2012 - 09:07 AM

I do use the quote function unless I'm giving an in-line response in which case regular quotes are easier. I'm not used to the forum html.


Press the quote button. You're not quoting otherwise there would be a quote box, (except for the post above, I think this is the only one with a quote?)

If you want to respond to specific points do what I do and break it up within the quote box with numbers.

#79 agnophilo123

agnophilo123

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Ohio

Posted 13 November 2012 - 09:07 AM

He is accusing us of the very things he is doing.

He is accusing us of the very things he is doing.

Quote me.
  • gilbo12345 likes this

#80 Calypsis4

Calypsis4

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Retired science teacher with 26 yrs of experience: Biology, physical sciences, & physics.
  • Age: 64
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Midwest, USA

Posted 13 November 2012 - 09:31 AM

Quote me.


No problem:

"Stop obnoxiously repeating what I said back to me and pretending it's a 'gotcha'."


(1) he was not being obnoxious and (2) He didn't say 'gotcha' O imaginative one.

The man you're posting to is one of the nicest persons on this board and he is anything but obnoxious. The truth is that you have an attitude towards Christians who pin-point your mistakes and failures in logic.

Does anybody actually READ what an atheist says on this forum? Or just glance at it and then proceed to attack the atheist.


Attitude. You come here with bad attitude and make statements that we have debated many times with many skeptics and you think we should just blindly accept what you post as if you were the first one to come up with that stuff.

Did you really think you could come to this Christian website and not be confronted with the gospel truth...part of which is that God is Creator and he created the world just the way He said He did in Genesis?
  • gilbo12345 likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users