Anyone else notice?

[Jarhead]

OK...my error.
I should have used the "laws of science"....or perhaps I should have defined each action such as "a tsunami" or "clay from the mountains painting the water red"....but we are adults and I assumed you would not play semantics with me....and I assume you will not play that game again with me.

Religion does not keep changing its tune. Those that do not believe in the Bible put peoiple in a position to defend it. So yes, when "science" implies something can not happen, defenders fall back on "an act of God"...UNTIL "science" is then found to prove that it could have happened "scientifically."...

For example, until about a month ago, it was believed that all life ANYWHERE IN THE UNIVERSE must have certain elements to exist. ANd yet, we discovered life on our own planet that does NOT require such elements....knowledge of what is possible is always increasing.

And I disagree....it is not up to one to prove that Adam and Eve existed.....the belief they existed came fisrt. It is up to you or someone to prove that they didnt exist.

Nice civil debate....enjoying it....but please dont play the semantics game...iot gets us nowhere.

And by the way...I am not a religious man by any means...but I have studies to learn why religious people feel as they do.

I am not a liberal by any means...but I continually like to debate those that are liberal so I can understand why they feel as they do.

i wasnt playing semantics, i was simply stating that you thought god could apply science, which is untrue. everything in the bible is based upon a faith. a blind faith in believing something that can not be proven to be true.

most everything in the bible is based on acts of god. his creation of the world, the 10 commandments, the great flood, the 10 plagues. but when science goes on to prove that these things were not actual acts of god, but either occurrences in natural or simply impossibilities, then religion changes it tune and says, well since god created the world, he created the science behind it. which was never an argument before science came about and disproved the theory.

and yes you have to prove that adam and eve existed. you can only prove that things existed in nature. you can hypothosize about that things that you think have existed, (say things like bacteria, or viruses, or infrared & ultraviolet light, gases, atoms, etc etc) but until you can prove that they existed by using science, then they simply dont exist. just like anti-matter, and higgs bosom particle. they have been hypothesized to exist, but have not been proven yet. the burdon lies with those making the claim to prove that the claim is true.

I saw it as playing semantics...and I still see it as such....but as I said, I could have and I guess for your sake SHOULD have identified each individual geological and meterological event as opposed to applying the word scinece....but again, i see that as a diversion from the topic....

As for act of God....those with religious beliefs believe that a tsunami is an act of God. They believe an earthquake is an act of God. If God is in control of the Universe, perhaps they are acts of God. We, on earth, prove why things happen and how they happen, but we can not prove that it is not a higher being initiating the action. Yes, an earthquake is caused by the movement of the plates...but what caused the plates tomove. Pressure. What caused the pressure? The way the earth was created. Why was it created that way? I can go all the way down the line.

As for Adam and Eve...OK...I will give in on this one and I will prove they existed. Somewhere down the line, there was a first man and a first woman.

 

[Misty]

You are supposed to provide a link person

There is a link in my original post

 

[xotoxi]

When ever someone on the left is accused of Rape or sexual misconduct the liberals always defend them?

Where does this happen?

 

[M14 Shooter]

As for Adam and Eve...OK...I will give in on this one and I will prove they existed. Somewhere down the line, there was a first man and a first woman.

See, what you fail to understand is that -we- aren't human.
Mitochondrial Eve was half-human, half-Cylon.

 

[Jarhead]

So you would deny the premise of this clumsy thread?

No...I agree with it and that is why I responded to what you said.

Thinking that we believe we are holier than thou is the problem.

We do not...we will make mistakes. We will deviate from our beleifs...but it does not mean we are not striving to be the epitome.

But, alas, we are human....but the epitome is our goal, Not who we are....what we strive to be.

You take it that we feel it is who we are so if we prove otherwise, you crucify us for it.

It's when Conservatives bear a standard they feel is appropriate for the country and then prove that they themselves are not up to it. That's when the justifiable calls of hypocrisy begin.

And yet, today, here on this thread, Conservatives invoke the word "Chappaquiddick" the way Aladdin invokes "Open Sesame". A magical word to rub in the noses of Liberals. A 'crucifixion', if you will.

All this while Conservatives solicit sex in airport restrooms and send salacious texts to under-aged Congressional pages. All this while Conservatives sell the notion that homosexuals will disrupt the military like a bag of snakes can disrupt a commercial flight. That a frozen zygote in a petri dish is a human being. That it's a perfectly acceptable tactic to harass and harangue a teenage girl as she seeks help from Planned Parenthood.

Not me Nosmo...

I am against abortion from my value system. I do not believe I have the right to tell a woman what to do with her body. I will always support freedom of choice.

And I have said more than once in this thread that I know very few conservaitves that believe they have reached the pinnacle of morality.

We strive for it; most will never acheive it.

And as for Chapopaquidik and the rest?

The left and the right will always quibble about that crap knowing dam well that they support just as many that are guilty of the same crap.

 

[Common Sense]

I saw it as playing semantics...and I still see it as such....but as I said, I could have and I guess for your sake SHOULD have identified each individual geological and meterological event as opposed to applying the word scinece....but again, i see that as a diversion from the topic....

As for act of God....those with religious beliefs believe that a tsunami is an act of God. They believe an earthquake is an act of God. If God is in control of the Universe, perhaps they are acts of God. We, on earth, prove why things happen and how they happen, but we can not prove that it is not a higher being initiating the action. Yes, an earthquake is caused by the movement of the plates...but what caused the plates tomove. Pressure. What caused the pressure? The way the earth was created. Why was it created that way? I can go all the way down the line.

As for Adam and Eve...OK...I will give in on this one and I will prove they existed. Somewhere down the line, there was a first man and a first woman.

that is if you take the leap of faith in believing the god created the universe and earth, instead of the big bang and that the universe created itself.

and the pressure is created the core of the earth which is is constant movement. (but see before science was able to explain all of these things, the common belief was that if something wasnt able to be explained, it was simply an act of god) then after science was able to explain something, religion changed its tune and adopted the scientific explanation, but called the scientific explanation the work of god. how can you keep changing the basis of the religion every time?

so if we discover life on another planet, did god create that too? there is no mention in the bible of aliens or life form besides those on earth. it also doesnt make any mention of other planets or galaxies.

 

[M14 Shooter]

that is if you take the leap of faith in believing the god created the universe and earth, instead of the big bang and that the universe created itself.

How do you know that God didn't cause the Big Bang?

...and the pressure is created the core of the earth which is is constant movement..

All of which is a direct, if distant, result of the Big Bang. See above.

so if we discover life on another planet, did god create that too?

Why not? Nothing in the Bible specifies that Earth is the only place that God created life.

 

[Jarhead]

I saw it as playing semantics...and I still see it as such....but as I said, I could have and I guess for your sake SHOULD have identified each individual geological and meterological event as opposed to applying the word scinece....but again, i see that as a diversion from the topic....

As for act of God....those with religious beliefs believe that a tsunami is an act of God. They believe an earthquake is an act of God. If God is in control of the Universe, perhaps they are acts of God. We, on earth, prove why things happen and how they happen, but we can not prove that it is not a higher being initiating the action. Yes, an earthquake is caused by the movement of the plates...but what caused the plates tomove. Pressure. What caused the pressure? The way the earth was created. Why was it created that way? I can go all the way down the line.

As for Adam and Eve...OK...I will give in on this one and I will prove they existed. Somewhere down the line, there was a first man and a first woman.

that is if you take the leap of faith in believing the god created the universe and earth, instead of the big bang and that the universe created itself.

and the pressure is created the core of the earth which is is constant movement. (but see before science was able to explain all of these things, the common belief was that if something wasnt able to be explained, it was simply an act of god) then after science was able to explain something, religion changed its tune and adopted the scientific explanation, but called the scientific explanation the work of god. how can you keep changing the basis of the religion every time?

so if we discover life on another planet, did god create that too? there is no mention in the bible of aliens or life form besides those on earth. it also doesnt make any mention of other planets or galaxies.

yes CS...exactly...there are those that believe in the Big Bang (such as myself) and those that believe in God as the creator. And who knows, maybe it was God that created the big bang?

And yes, I know that it is pressure at the core that creates the plate movements...but maybe it was God that designed the earth so it would have certain geological events...perhapos so people can experience sorrow and therefore appreciate happiness....(just a theory)...

And why should the bible discuss anything that people were not aware of? How could they write about other planets if they did not know they existed?

We can debate this all day long. Ironically, I agree with you...but our differefnce is, I understand why the other side belkieves as they do....and I am just trying to show you that they are not irrational as Truthmatters said.

 

[shintao]

When ever someone on the left is accused of Rape or sexual misconduct the liberals always defend them? Make disparaging remarks about the charges and generally claim nothing important happened?

Of course if a Republican even smiles at a pretty girl those same people are all hot to prosecute for something, anything.

 

[Ernie S.]

Do you understand that man originated as a pack animal?

The morals you speak of originated out of a collective need to help each other.

Its really no damned mystery

Who's morals are right, who gets to determine what is 'moral'?

You do, and I do, and Truthmatters does. Sure, our morals will be different, and I will tell you your's are wrong as you will me. If, however, we 3 try to live up to our moral code, we should be able to coexist.

 

[Common Sense]

that is if you take the leap of faith in believing the god created the universe and earth, instead of the big bang and that the universe created itself.

How do you know that God didn't cause the Big Bang? if god caused the big bang, why doesnt the bible refer to the other planets or galaxies? also the bible says god created the universe in 6 days, science has proven that the universe was not created in 6 days.

...and the pressure is created the core of the earth which is is constant movement..

All of which is a direct, if distant, result of the Big Bang. See above. once again, then why doesnt the bible explain what an earthquake is instead of it being left to assumption

so if we discover life on another planet, did god create that too?

Why not? Nothing in the Bible specifies that Earth is the only place that God created life.
the bible states the god created the following:
- In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
no mention of the other planets, solar systems, not even by some stretch of the imagination.
-And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light
no mention that the sun is what creates light through it dispersal of energy, or that there is more than one sun in the universe.

before there was the theory of the big bang it was assumed god created the universe. then science came to understand the the big bang created the universe, and religion said well god created the big bang. like i said, religion keeps changing its story to adapt to the changes in realization of the world.

here an interesting question the, if "god" created man in his own image, who created god? is there a super god that god answers to? and why is god immortal? is that impossible? but if god is immortal, then why isnt man immortal? if man was created by god in his own image, then would it be suffice to say that man should be immortal as well? and what about homosexuals? if god created homosexuals, was he a homosexual as well? and if god created the black man, or the asian man or the indian man, why isnt god ever depicted as black, asian or indian? and if god created man in his own image, then was that image the man we know today? or was it homoerectus? or the neanderthal man? if thats the case then was god the same as homoerectus or the neandethal man?

there are so many holes like this in the creationism theory, how can it be true?

 

[Ernie S.]

Why will none here answer the question.

Is Science superior to myth?

Is a hammer superior to a wrench?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Oh my, hit a nerve on ol' RGS. Well, RGS, you dumb ass, read Newties comments concerning the lady that drowned her two children in the river. And then notice how he shut up when it came out that she had been the victum of incest with her father since she was a small child. And her father was the Republican Committee Chairman for that Southern State County.

There are evil people in every group, pretending, as you do, that they only exist in some other group is the evidence of a weak mind, wedded to a weak ideology.

Sort of like the false accuser in the Duke rape case?

Wasn't she just in trouble for abusing her kids?

She was a "big" figure on the left- what happened to her?

You are fucking insane

You don't think it was evil what she did?

Oh yes, I forgot- lower standards for the left

 

[TheLonelySquire]

How about moral standards that dont include the doctrine of Your religion.

I want my politicians to be honest about policy and vote with the best interests of their constituients.

If you cant meet your own religions tennets then dont expect everyone else who doesnt share your religion to meet them.

Where do moral standards originate?

The minds of humans

Then one would have to believe those standards change, would they not?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Don't forget the whole Edward fiasco

The MSM would not touch that while he was a possible VP choice for PapaObama
How sad that it took a "tabloid" paper to break the story

 

[Jarhead]

that is if you take the leap of faith in believing the god created the universe and earth, instead of the big bang and that the universe created itself.

How do you know that God didn't cause the Big Bang? if god caused the big bang, why doesnt the bible refer to the other planets or galaxies? also the bible says god created the universe in 6 days, science has proven that the universe was not created in 6 days.


All of which is a direct, if distant, result of the Big Bang. See above. once again, then why doesnt the bible explain what an earthquake is instead of it being left to assumption

so if we discover life on another planet, did god create that too?

Why not? Nothing in the Bible specifies that Earth is the only place that God created life.
the bible states the god created the following:
- In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
no mention of the other planets, solar systems, not even by some stretch of the imagination.
-And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light
no mention that the sun is what creates light through it dispersal of energy, or that there is more than one sun in the universe.

before there was the theory of the big bang it was assumed god created the universe. then science came to understand the the big bang created the universe, and religion said well god created the big bang. like i said, religion keeps changing its story to adapt to the changes in realization of the world.

here an interesting question the, if "god" created man in his own image, who created god? is there a super god that god answers to? and why is god immortal? is that impossible? but if god is immortal, then why isnt man immortal? if man was created by god in his own image, then would it be suffice to say that man should be immortal as well? and what about homosexuals? if god created homosexuals, was he a homosexual as well? and if god created the black man, or the asian man or the indian man, why isnt god ever depicted as black, asian or indian? and if god created man in his own image, then was that image the man we know today? or was it homoerectus? or the neanderthal man? if thats the case then was god the same as homoerectus or the neandethal man?

there are so many holes like this in the creationism theory, how can it be true?

Why is it that science can change to adapt to new discoveries but religion is villified if it does?

3 months ago, life without certain elements was deemed by the science community as impossible. Then, here on earth, they found a life form that can survive and reproduce without such elements.

If Religion did NOT adapt to new discoveries, wouldn't you be more likely to villify them for NOT rationalizing such discoveries...and therfore ignoring such discoveries?

 

[rightwinger]

Did you ever notice that posters make broad generic observations about the other side but never seem to back them up?

 

[Jarhead]

Did you ever notice that posters make broad generic observations about the other side but never seem to back them up?

Yep....and it frustrates the hell out of me.
But you ceretainly can not deny that it happens on both sides.

 

[Truthmatters]

Where do moral standards originate?

The minds of humans

Then one would have to believe those standards change, would they not?

They have

 

[Truthmatters]

Sort of like the false accuser in the Duke rape case?

Wasn't she just in trouble for abusing her kids?

She was a "big" figure on the left- what happened to her?

You are fucking insane

You don't think it was evil what she did?

Oh yes, I forgot- lower standards for the left

She is some hooker and not a leader of anyone.

You are insane