{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/27/2015 12:03:56 PM
26
Who wrote the Bible? Men. Who wrote every other religious text? Men. What evidence do you have that your religion is true and every single other religion is false? None. I think that an intelligent person can base opinions off of hard, factual evidence. If you can't, you are wasting my time because I don't have time for your "faith" bullshit. Along with that, the Bible makes SOOO many contradictory statements, and statements that people choose to ignore. Do you eat shrimp? Do you eat bacon/ham/pork? If you do, you're sinning. If God is so "forgiving" why do natural disasters occur? Why would he kill off an entire church of priests off the coast of Ireland with an earthquake, and not do shit to terrorist groups such as ISIS? Maybe us atheists don't NEED scientific evidence to make a valid argument, we can just use your Bible. If we do make a scientific argument that has been proven (cough cough evolution cough cough) you claim it to be false, and when we tell you that the Bible is an unoriginal book of fairy tales stolen from other religions and cultures (Ex: Noah's Ark and the story of Gilgamesh. A wise old man had a giant boat that fit 2 of every animal somewhere within the story, before a massive flood occurred.) you claim our statements to be false with no evidence to back you up. Here is another hassle to explain to you: The Big Bang. You say that God created The Big Bang, but do you have any evidence to support that? No, you just jump to conclusions. We do have enough evidence to validate the possibility of The Big Bang, just not enough to prove it, yet. Talk to me when you have a valid argument supported by truthful evidence.
English
-
Well said.
-
Your first few statements have nothing to do with the op. But, then your next few statements prove the op. The bible was written by men inspired by God. I believe Christianity is true, because I've studied other religions and naturalism and Christianity provides the most plausible worldview.
-
"Men inspired by God" Please give me evidence to prove this as a fact. I would really like to know how men who don't have a religious text to study can believe in such fairytales. And also, explain to me all the stollen stories, if they were so inspired by God. Also, explain to me all the impossible shit that happens in the Bible, like Noah fitting 2 of every animal in the world onto a boat vastly too small for that much cargo
-
Men who didn't have the religious text believed it because they saw it. And if God exists, the miracles in the bible are non issues.
-
So you're claiming that they saw their God and every single writer of every other religious text didn't see their God?
-
Pretty much. Most other religions never claim to have seen their god. I also believe what the bible says about other gods. They are usually demons. So I deny the spiritual experiences that other religions claim, I believe that they are demonic. http://bible.com/100/2co.11.14.nasb No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
-
Edited by RubenSargasm: 8/27/2015 12:46:59 PMOk , so men who have seen God wrote a book about a bunch of stuff. Is there ANY sort of evidence whatsoever to validate anything in the Bible? Considering that evolution is a proven fact, it disproves many tales brought to you by the Bible. Since it is a proven fact, does that mean that God mislead the writers of the Bible? Or did they just make everything up?
-
Evolution isn't a proven fact. And evolution doesn't disprove God or the bible.
-
Here is where the argument ends. I will not argue with someone who rejects a proven fact with loads more evidence than the entirety of their religious text, have a good day.
-
You know what they say about assumptions... I didn't reject evolution, but it's not a proven fact. It's highly agreed upon speculation. And again, it doesn't disprove God or his role as the creator. Evolution is a mechanism.
-
Evolution is a fact that's not debatable.
-
No it's not.
-
Correct it's not debatable.
-
So is evolution a fact? If by "evolution" one simply means "evolution #1," i.e. small-scale change over time within a species, then evolution is indeed a fact. No one disputes this kind of "evolution." Thus when Johnjoe McFadden states that "[s]cientists have measured evolutionary changes in scores of organisms" and therefore evolution "is as much a fact as gravity or erosion," he is stating the obvious because he is simply referring to evolution #1. But Dr. McFadden is pulling a bait-and-switch: he is using relatively trivial examples of evolution #1 to bolster more controversial definitions of "evolution." Thus if by "evolution" one means universal common descent (evolution #2), or neo-Darwinian evolution (evolution #3), where the primary adaptive force building the complexity of life is unguided natural selection acting upon random mutations, then many scientists would argue that such "evolution" most certainly is not a fact. http://www.discovery.org/a/6401
-
You need to look up speciation, natural selection and evolution you are blurring the three under one title of evolution.
-
No you are. You say evolution is a fact, but the only part that is a fact is small adaptation that happens over a short period of time. The other aspects are not fact, just like the link that I posted says.
-
I have a masters degree on this I know what I am taking about what you refer to as neodarwinism evolution is natural selection and speciation is the process of how [b]evolution[/b] can lead to the development of 2 species from one. My claim is correct evolution is fact. You are arguing against other processes not evolution.
-
Only changes that occur in a short period of time can be observed. Anything outside of that is speculation and inference, it is not fact.
-
Evolution is a single nucleotide polymorphism (mutation) that has a phenotypic change to the organism that provides a fitness benefit for that individual.
-
I understand that and that aspect is a fact, I'm not arguing that. But the theory that that mechanism gave rise to every living thing is not a fact. And common descent is an integral part of the the theory of evolution and it is also not a fact. Therefore as a whole, the theory of evolution is not a fact.
-
Right what u agreed with is evolution thats what I am trying to get across to you. You have the rest reversed evolution is the mechanism behind or the backbone to those processes.
-
And that's precisely what isn't a fact. There is no observable proof that said mechanism can produce all the varieties of life that we have.
-
Never said that I said evolution was a fact
-
I was talking about the theory of evolution as a whole.
-
More agreed upon than demons.... but you got no problem with that? Ugh, enjoy the dark ages, man. You know, the technology you take for granted every day that let's you post ignorant stuff like this is real miracles we've achieved through science. And believing any other religions deity is a demon just exposes your background of indoctrination.
