Argue about Christianity  and God..

Why do you think what you think?

Views: 914

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The bible makes creationism out to seem like "god" was playing with clay, snapped his fingers, then we came to life.

 

No where does the bible talk about evolution in the book of Genesis, or the chemical process "god" took to make us.

 

The idea of a "creationist scientist" is like saying, "that's the blackest white tank top I've ever seen", or "fighting for peace".  It's an oxymoron.  If you believe in creationism without evolution, then there is no science, there is just faith.

 

Now, creationism with evolution makes a lot more sense to me (even though you still can't scientifically explain the creationism part).  Something had to generate that first speck of dust, which molded into an amoeba, which then grew arms and legs, crawled out of the water, grew hair, walked up straight, then started using tools.  All of this could have happened between the 5th and 6th days that Genesis talks about, but, the bible leaves out those vital pieces of info.

 

The bible really reminds me of Lost.   So many plot wholes.

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:

no.

 

have you ever taken a science class, and if so, are you familiar with the scientific method?

 

so-called creation scientists (not to be confused with scientists who believe in creationism but work in a different scientific field) base their "theories" on assumptions, not observations, evidence, and tests. they operate under the idea that there is one creator, and his powers are limitless, and that everything he created was done way back in the day. that kind of hypothesis is unable to be tested, meaning it's not science.


MrFrenchDog said:

Well there are creationist scientists, and they out science behind the bible's version of events. Good enough for ya?

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:
creationism isn't based in science, so it's not a scientific theory. cute argument, though.

MrFrenchDog said:

Creation is also known as a theory, though evolution is more widely acknowledged as the truth and the only rational explanation... and i think that new information will be presented in the future that will disprove it. 



White and Black holes

 

I figured out where that spec of dust might have come from, either another universe, or straight up Space Residents

 

 

Big Bang- Theory     Macroevolution- Theory       Obviously these hypotheses are widely accepted thus they became theories ...just putting those out there in response to previous posts

 

I think you are right about the Bible reminding you about Lost....it is the basic text of Christianity and Judaism  ( I am talking about part 1 here I am not familiar with part 2). I believe it is written in a way for purposes of imagery and life lessons/way of life. Every word and every letter has a purpose and meaning ( I have studied it extensively in the original language and the ancient commentaries). It is a prerequisite for further studies such as the talmud/gemara as well as Kabbalah.  If one was looking for a deeper understanding about creation, evolution, and the human soul then the Kabbalah would be your best bet...not the basic text of the bible. However, it takes many years of studying basic texts before one can truly grasp/perceive and understand this text. There are commentaries and books but then you have a mumble jumble of personal ideas and theories and thus you lose the true essence....and many of those are often written by people in a hurry to understand and miss important points....

I don't think such matters (ex. creation and the soul) are so simple to understand as our perception is limited...

have you ever read flatlands? This is talking about perceiving 3rd dimension from a 2nd dimension world. The sacred teachings of the bible describe 10 dimensions !

 

But anyway....this is all hypothetical...so I am going to focus on living my life day by day and not get too caught up in what could be the past or what might be the future....

 

 

 

Gregor =w= Langbehn said:

The bible makes creationism out to seem like "god" was playing with clay, snapped his fingers, then we came to life.

 

No where does the bible talk about evolution in the book of Genesis, or the chemical process "god" took to make us.

 

The idea of a "creationist scientist" is like saying, "that's the blackest white tank top I've ever seen", or "fighting for peace".  It's an oxymoron.  If you believe in creationism without evolution, then there is no science, there is just faith.

 

Now, creationism with evolution makes a lot more sense to me (even though you still can't scientifically explain the creationism part).  Something had to generate that first speck of dust, which molded into an amoeba, which then grew arms and legs, crawled out of the water, grew hair, walked up straight, then started using tools.  All of this could have happened between the 5th and 6th days that Genesis talks about, but, the bible leaves out those vital pieces of info.

 

The bible really reminds me of Lost.   So many plot wholes.

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:

no.

 

have you ever taken a science class, and if so, are you familiar with the scientific method?

 

so-called creation scientists (not to be confused with scientists who believe in creationism but work in a different scientific field) base their "theories" on assumptions, not observations, evidence, and tests. they operate under the idea that there is one creator, and his powers are limitless, and that everything he created was done way back in the day. that kind of hypothesis is unable to be tested, meaning it's not science.


MrFrenchDog said:

Well there are creationist scientists, and they out science behind the bible's version of events. Good enough for ya?

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:
creationism isn't based in science, so it's not a scientific theory. cute argument, though.

MrFrenchDog said:

Creation is also known as a theory, though evolution is more widely acknowledged as the truth and the only rational explanation... and i think that new information will be presented in the future that will disprove it. 




 and orange 

 and red

 and blue

we are very colorful here in the US


brofessefef said:

 

Why are some people black and some people white?

That answer is in the Book of Mormon. Sorry to bring that up.

brofessefef said:

 

Why are some people black and some people white?

the answer is in our DNA

PUPPIES! said:
That answer is in the Book of Mormon. Sorry to bring that up.

brofessefef said:

 

Why are some people black and some people white?

Hmm, ok, so you're saying that all the evidence piles up to support evolution? This reminds me of an article i read somewhere which basically suggests that all the facts are neutral, it's just how we perceive them.

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:

no.

 

have you ever taken a science class, and if so, are you familiar with the scientific method?

 

so-called creation scientists (not to be confused with scientists who believe in creationism but work in a different scientific field) base their "theories" on assumptions, not observations, evidence, and tests. they operate under the idea that there is one creator, and his powers are limitless, and that everything he created was done way back in the day. that kind of hypothesis is unable to be tested, meaning it's not science.


MrFrenchDog said:

Well there are creationist scientists, and they out science behind the bible's version of events. Good enough for ya?

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:
creationism isn't based in science, so it's not a scientific theory. cute argument, though.

MrFrenchDog said:

Creation is also known as a theory, though evolution is more widely acknowledged as the truth and the only rational explanation... and i think that new information will be presented in the future that will disprove it. 


Luigi-sp26 said:

a theory is a hypothesis that has been verified and accepted to be true.  the word theory in the scientific community basically means fact, it is only not determined a fact or law even after an overwhelming amount of evidence because there is the possibility of new information coming up to disprove it.   to have something called "theory" instead of "hypothesis" requires a huge amount of factual evidence. 


MrFrenchDog said:

Let's not forget that the science is just theories.. such as evolution, that's a theory not fact.

Gohi said:
I promise you any "unexplained event" you name can be explained by science.

Gregor =w= Langbehn said:

unexplained events, 

Maybe drunk and listening to this 

edgey44 said:

i loved how i made sense when drunk!

 

wait, did it make sense?

brofessefef said:

 

I love how the Jesus gang ignored this question.

edgey44 said:

i don't believe in god, however when i die and see god..............should he forgive me as forgiveness the Christian way, and into heaven i go

 

or am  just drunk again?

Because when the population made there way around the world, the places that they lived would have affected that. Kinda like evolution - except species aren't turning into other species, only evolving within their own.

brofessefef said:

 

Why are some people black and some people white?

i'm saying that there is evidence based on observations to support the theory of evolution.

 

that article basically suggests a lot of things, and most of them are wrong.

 

this whole thing where you post weak rebuttals without ever really committing yourself to any of them is wearing thin. i can see now why you were unable to start an argument on your own.


MrFrenchDog said:

Hmm, ok, so you're saying that all the evidence piles up to support evolution? This reminds me of an article i read somewhere which basically suggests that all the facts are neutral, it's just how we perceive them.

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:

no.

 

have you ever taken a science class, and if so, are you familiar with the scientific method?

 

so-called creation scientists (not to be confused with scientists who believe in creationism but work in a different scientific field) base their "theories" on assumptions, not observations, evidence, and tests. they operate under the idea that there is one creator, and his powers are limitless, and that everything he created was done way back in the day. that kind of hypothesis is unable to be tested, meaning it's not science.


MrFrenchDog said:

Well there are creationist scientists, and they out science behind the bible's version of events. Good enough for ya?

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:
creationism isn't based in science, so it's not a scientific theory. cute argument, though.

MrFrenchDog said:

Creation is also known as a theory, though evolution is more widely acknowledged as the truth and the only rational explanation... and i think that new information will be presented in the future that will disprove it. 


Luigi-sp26 said:

a theory is a hypothesis that has been verified and accepted to be true.  the word theory in the scientific community basically means fact, it is only not determined a fact or law even after an overwhelming amount of evidence because there is the possibility of new information coming up to disprove it.   to have something called "theory" instead of "hypothesis" requires a huge amount of factual evidence. 


MrFrenchDog said:

Let's not forget that the science is just theories.. such as evolution, that's a theory not fact.

Gohi said:
I promise you any "unexplained event" you name can be explained by science.

Gregor =w= Langbehn said:

unexplained events, 

I always liked this:

 

Evolution explains the how, but not the why.

 

it's idiotic to think evolution never happened.  I mean, archaeologists find skeletons that look half ape, half man.  It's pretty clear that evolution did happen.

Ok then, I'll commit to this:

I believe in creationism.

I do not believe in evolution the way that Mr Darwin wrote about, i think that men have always been men. I think that we can evolve within our species but not into other species.

Although if i were proved wrong on this it would not make me doubt the bible less as i could still see the bible working with evolution involved. However at the moment, and i am not saying this viewpoint will never change, i take the bible very literally.

 

 



kitten$ bieber ♥ said:

i'm saying that there is evidence based on observations to support the theory of evolution.

 

that article basically suggests a lot of things, and most of them are wrong.

 

this whole thing where you post weak rebuttals without ever really committing yourself to any of them is wearing thin. i can see now why you were unable to start an argument on your own.


MrFrenchDog said:

Hmm, ok, so you're saying that all the evidence piles up to support evolution? This reminds me of an article i read somewhere which basically suggests that all the facts are neutral, it's just how we perceive them.

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:

no.

 

have you ever taken a science class, and if so, are you familiar with the scientific method?

 

so-called creation scientists (not to be confused with scientists who believe in creationism but work in a different scientific field) base their "theories" on assumptions, not observations, evidence, and tests. they operate under the idea that there is one creator, and his powers are limitless, and that everything he created was done way back in the day. that kind of hypothesis is unable to be tested, meaning it's not science.


MrFrenchDog said:

Well there are creationist scientists, and they out science behind the bible's version of events. Good enough for ya?

kitten$ bieber ♥ said:
creationism isn't based in science, so it's not a scientific theory. cute argument, though.

MrFrenchDog said:

Creation is also known as a theory, though evolution is more widely acknowledged as the truth and the only rational explanation... and i think that new information will be presented in the future that will disprove it. 


Luigi-sp26 said:

a theory is a hypothesis that has been verified and accepted to be true.  the word theory in the scientific community basically means fact, it is only not determined a fact or law even after an overwhelming amount of evidence because there is the possibility of new information coming up to disprove it.   to have something called "theory" instead of "hypothesis" requires a huge amount of factual evidence. 


MrFrenchDog said:

Let's not forget that the science is just theories.. such as evolution, that's a theory not fact.

Gohi said:
I promise you any "unexplained event" you name can be explained by science.

Gregor =w= Langbehn said:

unexplained events, 

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Weezer Bootlegs

SOCIAL

  • Weezer Links

Weezer Mailing List

Music

Loading…

© 2014   Created by Weezer.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Offline

Live Video