|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: God used Evolution in 6 days | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 988 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
nah, just a god that forgives a serial killer because he has accepted Jesus as his lord and savior in the last minutes of his life before getting electrocuted... and then sends a Buddhist monk to hell.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5819 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
schraf writes: Actually, the vast, vast majority of pedophiles, and murderers for that matter, are heterosexual males who molest both boys and girls. I know this is way off topic for the thread itself, but I wanted to throw in a slight correction to the above statement. Pedophiles, as in those who are sexually attracted (and have sex with) both underage boys and girls are by nature (and definition) bisexual. Pedophiles, as used as a replacement term for child molester, who rape BOTH boys and girls are primarily bisexual, though heavily conflicted and confused about their sexuality which leads to the insane behaviors they act out on children. Murderers may have more heterosexual males among their ranks for the simple reason there are more heterosexual men than homosexual men in the general population. Murderers who target their victims based on sexual issues, or commit them in combination with sexual abuse of the victim, are often sexually conflicted and not truly hetero at all, though will often profess that orientation as some sort of superiority to others (that confliction usually being what drove them off the deep end). Some statistics have shown that a greater proportion of homosexuals end up commiting crimes (specifically sex crimes) than heterosexual men. Which means that despite overall percentages of prison populations, in the outside world homosexuals ARE more likely to be the sexual criminal. This is not to say that I put any stock in statistical stereotyping of any kind. They are only good for bookkeeping, not marginalizing segments of the population. Besides, whether statistics favor something other than the "demon" he created, such things actually do occur. Even if they are the minority, clearly he thinks homosexual pedophilic murderers are the lowest of the low. I'll stick with murderers as a whole being the lowest. Once the killing starts I can't find much use in sorting them according to reason why. ------------------holmes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3941 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
It seems to me, that the essence of the beginning of this topic, was that God created a young universe with the false appearance of old age.
My counter proposal is that God created an old universe with a false Biblical indication/appearance of young age. The ultimate question is, why does the YEC viewpoint want the content of the text of the Bible to trump what the evidence of the creation (the universe) itself says? Moose
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5819 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
minnemooseus writes: The ultimate question is, why does the YEC viewpoint want the content of the text of the Bible to trump what the evidence of the creation (the universe) itself says? Actually this is what I am interested in myself and apologize for my earlier post continuing the topic drift. Let me throw this in as a sort of extension of the ultimate question minnemooseus posed. If God put in so much effort to make it look like the universe is old, and that life evolved (ie created the "fake age"), isn't it almost blasphemous to question the evidence he provided for us? I mean his doing this does indicate he wanted humans to believe in the physical mechanisms he gave us evidence for, right? It seems to me that evidence ought to trump text, as the universe is beyond question the work of a God or Gods (if it had an intelligent creator), while a book claiming to have been written by God could have been written by anyone. ------------------holmes
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
docpotato Member (Idle past 5047 days) Posts: 334 From: Portland, OR Joined: |
Headcase-
If God created a World and a Universe that directly contradicts his own teachings to us, in this example, The Bible, then how can we ever trust anything he says? How are we supposed to know at which time he is just testing our character through observable evidence that contradicts what he's said and at which time he is telling the truth?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Headcase Inactive Member |
I dont think murder is as bad as homosexuality... Moses murdered, David murdered, Paul murdered... none of them ever stooped to the level of confusion and satanic worship of their own sexual lusts that most homosexuals do today... anyways just thought id throw that out there to all you homosexuals who think you were born that way... coming soon : Sodom and Gramorah part two, san francisco
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Moses murdered, David murdered, Paul murdered... none of them ever stooped to the level of confusion and satanic worship of their own sexual lusts that most homosexuals do today... Actually David was gay, too.
anyways just thought id throw that out there to all you homosexuals who think you were born that way... They actually were born that way. Heredity studies confirm a genetic basis to homosexuality. What's so satanic about two men having sex, anyway? I don't get it. I mean, I don't like mushrooms on my pizza any more than I like having sex with men, but I don't think mushrooms on pizza is satanic...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zephyr Member (Idle past 4550 days) Posts: 821 From: FOB Taji, Iraq Joined: |
quote:You have got to be effin' kidding me. How many satanic lust-worshipping homosexuals do you personally know? I'll bet all my cash and a couple of limbs you're just regurgitating the same rhetorical garbage someone fed you, the same I was fed in my fundie church a few years ago before I saw the light. Since then, probably unlike you, I have actually known a few men who prefer to have sex with men, and they have been just like everyone else: just trying to get by in the world, go to work, pay their bills, and have a roof over their head and food on the table and a few friends who accept them for what they are. Honestly, you need to think about the words you say and what they really mean. If you did, you'd probably realize you have no basis for saying them beyond the fact that you heard them and it makes you feel purposeful when you repeat them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zephyr Member (Idle past 4550 days) Posts: 821 From: FOB Taji, Iraq Joined: |
quote:Not to go sidetracking the discussion, but I'd just like to suggest that if you did both those things in the dark and then turned on the lights, one would probably cause you slightly more concern than the other.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: Out of curiosity, would you rather have a man lick your penis, or stab you in the throat with a pen-knife?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zephyr Member (Idle past 4550 days) Posts: 821 From: FOB Taji, Iraq Joined: |
quote:Is it just me, or is today's level of unintentionally hilarious comments way higher than normal? Or did I smoke a bowl this morning and forget about it, and find myself way too easily amused? (I'm kidding; my employer tests regularly)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Headcase Inactive Member |
Basically, all I was trying to say in my opening hypothesis was this.
Vitalism is the belief in the supernatural means of creation of life. Mechanism is the belief in purely mechanical means of creation of life. My whole propostion was that they are both valid veiws. I believe in the Bible as the vital innerrant Word of God. It has no flaw. I also belive that most of the theories put foward by modern science are also true. I put the Bible before those views however. If a theory condradicts the Bible, it is wrong. Therefore, I came to believe in the idea of inherent age. I explained part of this in my first statement. The whole idea of evolution as means in and of itself as a means of creation seem wholly illogical. Only a purpose behind the randomness of the universe could have guided it to its present state. Most scientist's argument really isn't with proving that God did not create them, it's with accepting a force higher and more powerful than their own efforts. They want to go their own way. They don't want to think of themselves as being held accountable. So they come to their respective feilds with that presupposition. To say that they don't assume anything is laughable. That is not the issue however. The issue is that when God created the universe by speaking it into existance, He used a mechanical process. Just because humans can figure out how that process works, doesn't negate the author of it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: I hope you brought enough for everybody. Pass to Headcase first. That guy needs to chill out a little.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Headcase Inactive Member |
I Timothy 3:16-17
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Headcase Inactive Member |
Wow, thats deep... lets not think... lets destroy our brains and lungs... duh, that sounds fun...
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024