Penn and Teller Bullsh*t - Creationism *vids*

[TheAsianMan]

Come on dude. Do you really think I am going to read an entire thread because you think I am "unaware"? I am aware of the fact that evolution is a theory just like creationism and has not been proven, therefore calling people ignorant if they do not believe in evolution is in itself ignorant. Have a good day.

no you are NOT aware.

here ill help you with a link that even a monkey can read

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpo...1&postcount=14

Intelligent design in a scientific view point is NOT a theory

do you know the scientific steps it takes for a observation to become a hypothesis then to become a theory? ID does can not fit those steps and should not even be consider a hypothesis.

[jmonty]

What the ****...do people actually think like this?

maybe it was meant to be cycles of the moon.. those numbers divided by 12 are more realistic.

[mug]

Come on dude. Do you really think I am going to read an entire thread because you think I am "unaware"? I am aware of the fact that evolution is a theory just like creationism and has not been proven, therefore calling people ignorant if they do not believe in evolution is in itself ignorant. Have a good day.

Evolution is a theory in the scientific sense
Creationism is a theory in the general sense

You can't compare the two as creationism isn't even science based. Its like comparing a human to a leprechaun.

[JAGERBOY]

ah, i weep for the future.



"Evolution is are a fact because that guy in a lab coat said so!!!!!1!"
?

Its really scary to think that people are that ignorant to the scientific method that they really think this is how it works.

I also weep for the future, but based on statements like that.

[stateless]

That's their favorite word to call Christians in order to slander them to make themsleves look better. Very old trick.

even the previous pope said that there is scientific basis for evolution and that religion shouldn't attempt to attack that. Research that. Educate yourself. In that regard Anh's message was not dumb at all.

[TheAsianMan]

ah, i weep for the future.

"you so stupid becuase you believe in teh biblez!!! hahaha!!!"

and then...

"Evolution is are a fact because that guy in a lab coat said so!!!!!1!"

and you listen to a guy on a robe holding a 3,000+ year old book.

[QuicksandATL]

Why couldn't have god inspired myth? Why can't Genesis be interpreted as a story with meaning istead of a factual scientific report?
If anything I think the creation story in Genesis says more about human nature than anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framewo..._%28Genesis%29

Oh and to those who are being disrespectful, how do you expect to persuade these people acting the way you are? Stop being dickheads.

Well, whatever the case may be, Genesis and science are easily reconcilable. While barely skimming over that link, I do agree with it. I don't consider the earth to be made in six 24 hour days and I don't believe that all life forms are exactly the same the way they first created. The Bible gives us no reason for believing otherwise.

Biblical prophecies (i.e. dates being successfully predicted with no margin of error) show that the Bible is more than just the words of men. So, if it can be shown that God is indeed inspiring the Bible, then I have no reason not to believe that mankind may have lived to 969 years at one time.

Most people on here are quick to make assumptions about beliefs and don't consider any underlying causes, immediately thinking that the thoughts are ungrounded and baseless.

[mug]

Well, whatever the case may be, Genesis and science are easily reconcilable..

Can you show us how they are reconcilable ?, its one thing to say but another entirely to prove it.

[QuicksandATL]

Can you show us how they are reconcilable ?, its one thing to say but another entirely to prove it.

What isn't reconcilable about it?

[Kion]

And we wonder why the United States is falling behind in science education. It doesn't matter if you're a fundamentalist or not, we have a culture that embraces stupidity and no one seems to care. We have people wanting to limit Fs at 50% to not hurt kids feelings, not holding back kinds how need an extra year and want to teach that the earth is 6000 years old...

/short, probably making no sense rant

[JAGERBOY]

What isn't reconcilable about it?

Yup, Quicksand is definitely on a trolling spree lately.

[TheAsianMan]

Well, whatever the case may be, Genesis and science are easily reconcilable. While barely skimming over that link, I do agree with it. I don't consider the earth to be made in six 24 hour days and I don't believe that all life forms are exactly the same the way they first created. The Bible gives us no reason for believing otherwise.

Biblical prophecies (i.e. dates being successfully predicted with no margin of error) show that the Bible is more than just the words of men. So, if it can be shown that God is indeed inspiring the Bible, then I have no reason not to believe that mankind may have lived to 969 years at one time.

Most people on here are quick to make assumptions about beliefs and don't consider any underlying causes, immediately thinking that the thoughts are ungrounded and baseless.

dude you use to be pretty reasonable but wtf happen?

[QuicksandATL]

dude you use to be pretty reasonable but wtf happen?

What isn't reasonable about me accepting that I think Biblical prophecies being fulfilled point to divine inspiration?

Yup, Quicksand is definitely on a trolling spree lately.

no u

[Galt]

Well, whatever the case may be, Genesis and science are easily reconcilable.

You are part of the Intelligent Design movement, your interpretation of Genesis is never, ever going to be compatible with modern science.

Biblical prophecies (i.e. dates being successfully predicted with no margin of error) show that the Bible is more than just the words of men.

You keep mentioning these prophecies. Go ahead and post your reasons up Quicksand. I'd love to read about your irrefutable, non-faith based evidence.

[Thy_Kingdom]

dude you use to be pretty reasonable but wtf happen?

This happened:

Yes I am sure. I said the average lifespans were between 365 and age 969.
Hint for the slow: the mean of 365 and 969 is not 969.

People lived longer back then because sin had not fully taken effect, soon after peoples life-spans quickly dwindled. Obviously I cannot prove this to be fact, but I accept it as fact because I believe the Bible to be inspired by God. (no non-Atlas)

[QuicksandATL]

You keep mentioning these prophecies. Go ahead and post your reasons up Quicksand. I'd love to read about your irrefutable, non-faith based evidence.

Destruction of cities, along with who would be the conquerer. Daniel's prophecy of 1914, in connection with Jesus' sign of his coming of a world war.

I really don't feel like getting into this, because I know you're too close minded to accept anything.

[Galt]

Destruction of cities, along with who would be the conquerer. Daniel's prophecy of 1914, in connection with Jesus' sign of his coming of a world war.

I really don't feel like getting into this, because I know you're too close minded to accept anything.

Because I'm "close minded to accept anything"?
I'm willing to observe any evidence you can present, and I think that if you have evidence for what you are claiming you should definitely share it with everyone.

[Thy_Kingdom]

Destruction of cities, along with who would be the conquerer. Daniel's prophecy of 1914, in connection with Jesus' sign of his coming of a world war.

I really don't feel like getting into this, because I know you're too close minded to accept anything.

*Grabs popcorn*

[shadowwalker021]

Because I'm "close minded to accept anything"?
I'm willing to observe any evidence you can present, and I think that if you have evidence for what you are claiming you should definitely share it with everyone.

x2 I would love for Christianity to be true. I want to hear the evidence (serious)

[Rune]

Destruction of cities, along with who would be the conquerer. Daniel's prophecy of 1914, in connection with Jesus' sign of his coming of a world war.

I really don't feel like getting into this, because I know you're too close minded to accept anything.

I could have sworn you crazy JW's predicted the second coming of Jesus in 1914. You know, until it didn't happen, then you guys had to change the story to get the egg of your faces.


http://www.towerwatch.com/Witnesses/...prophecies.htm

You guys should check some of these 1914 ones, funny stuff.

[hugeness]

Yup, Quicksand is definitely on a trolling spree lately.

It's comical how atheist renegade douchebags like yourself throw the troll word around to try and make other posters opinion invalid. It doesnt work by the way. We all have our own beliefs and agendas so why don't you keep the stupid troll slinging **** to yourself. Yes, Christian, no Jesus wouldnt say some of the words I just said, no, don't care.

[Galt]

I could have sworn you crazy JW's predicted the second coming of Jesus in 1914. You know, until it didn't happen, then you guys had to change the story to get the egg of your faces.


http://www.towerwatch.com/Witnesses/...prophecies.htm

You guys should check some of these 1914 ones, funny stuff.

lol


Quicksand, is this your prophecy? I'm very interested in hearing about your non-faith-based evidence. IT appears as though you have since replied to other threads, but avoided this one. I wonder why, the discussion was just beginning to get interesting!

[user1245464]

You keep mentioning these prophecies. Go ahead and post your reasons up Quicksand. I'd love to read about your irrefutable, non-faith based evidence.

Because I'm "close minded to accept anything"?
I'm willing to observe any evidence you can present, and I think that if you have evidence for what you are claiming you should definitely share it with everyone.

x2 I would love for Christianity to be true. I want to hear the evidence (serious)

I'm very interested in hearing about your non-faith-based evidence.

Interested also. Evidence please.

[-iLift-]

Quicksand, please post these prophecies. I don't debate/post here much, but when I try to be civil, and view all evidence unbiasedly.

[JAGERBOY]

It's comical how atheist renegade douchebags like yourself throw the troll word around to try and make other posters opinion invalid. It doesnt work by the way. We all have our own beliefs and agendas so why don't you keep the stupid troll slinging **** to yourself. Yes, Christian, no Jesus wouldnt say some of the words I just said, no, don't care.

Actually I used to have respect for Quicksand and found him to be one of the more intelligent theists. Over the past week however he has morphed into some sort of fundy troll, I don't know what happened.

P.S. Go fuck yourself.

[TheAsianMan]

It's comical how atheist renegade douchebags like yourself throw the troll word around to try and make other posters opinion invalid. It doesnt work by the way. We all have our own beliefs and agendas so why don't you keep the stupid troll slinging **** to yourself. Yes, Christian, no Jesus wouldnt say some of the words I just said, no, don't care.

everytime you cuss you make baby jesus cry.

[QuicksandATL]

I could have sworn you crazy JW's predicted the second coming of Jesus in 1914. You know, until it didn't happen, then you guys had to change the story to get the egg of your faces.


http://www.towerwatch.com/Witnesses/...prophecies.htm

You guys should check some of these 1914 ones, funny stuff.

Misrepresentation of JWs isn't going to get you anywhere, especially posting from anti-JW websites with an agenda.

Also, not Jesus' second coming, but his taking his rulership in heaven in accordance with Satan being cast out of heaven.

You'll honestly have to explain to me, no matter how so vague you can make it out to be, that in accordance with Daniel's prophecy of the ending of the Gentile times and paralleling it to Jesus' ending the Gentile times, that Jesus said that there will be wars and reports of wars, but not until nation rises against nation (a global conflict) would mark the end of the Gentile times. It just so happens October of 1914 is when WWI happened which is the exact time that Daniel prophesied.

Actually I used to have respect for Quicksand and found him to be one of the more intelligent theists. Over the past week however he has morphed into some sort of fundy troll, I don't know what happened.

P.S. Go fuck yourself.

I'm just getting tired of following lines of reasoning to show my point and instead just get straight to the point, no matter how ignorant or blunt it might seem.

[jday15]

QuicksandATL, as a JW, how on earth would you interpret John 1:1, 14?

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."

Or for that matter, John 8:58 "Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” or John 10:30 "I and the Father are one.” or John 14:8-9 "Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?"

[QuicksandATL]

QuicksandATL, as a JW, how on earth would you interpret John 1:1, 14?

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."

At John 1:1 there are two occurrences of the Greek noun theos (god). The first occurrence refers to Almighty God, with whom the Word was (and the Word [logos] was with God [a form of theos]). This first theos is preceded by the word ton (the), a form of the Greek definite article that points to a distinct identity, in this case Almighty God ("and the Word was with [the] God"). On the other hand, there is no article before the second theos at John 1:1. So a literal translation would read, "and god was the Word." Yet there are many translations render this second theos (a predicate noun) as "divine," "godlike," or "a god."

The Koine Greek language had a definite article (the), but it did not have an indefinite article (a or an). So when a predicate noun is not preceded by the definite article, it may be indefinite, depending on the context.

The Journal of Biblical Literature says that "expressions with no article predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning." This indicates that the logos can be likened to a god. It also says of John 1:1: "The qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun (theos) cannot be regarded as definite."

John 1:1 highlights the quality of the Word, that he was "divine," "godlike," "a god," but not Almighty God. This harmonizes with the rest of the Bible, which shows that Jesus, here called "the Word" in his role as God's Spokesman, was an obedient subordinate sent to earth by his Superior, Almighty God.

There are many other Bible verses in which almost all translators in other languages consistently insert the article "a" when translating Greek sentences with the same structure. For example, at Mark 6:49, when the disciples saw Jesus walking on water, the King James Version says: "They supposed it had been a spirit." In the Koine Greek, there is no "a" before "spirit." But almost all translations in other languages add an "a" in order to make the rendering fit the context. In the same way, since John 1:1 shows that the Word was with God, he could not be God but was "a god," or "divine."

A rigorous translation of the Bible demands such a placement. We see than in many respected Bible translations that John 1:1 is also translated with "a god", such as Wilson's Emphatic Diaglott, Goodspeed, and Tomanek's New Testament.

[nonAtlas]

Amazing things some of these creationists believe.

Go right ahead and cite some of the bull**** claims and I will easily demolish them for you. Or are you still hiding from me?