Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationism museum opens in Alberta
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 196 of 303 (405237)
06-11-2007 11:40 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by simple
06-11-2007 11:23 PM


Objection speculative, you don't know how I know all I know
My apologies - I've been forced to speculate that you are a Bible-believing Christian based solely on the fact that you posted a picture of Jesus resurrection and have accepted that as a fact, because you've refused to give us anything else. I'll ask, yet again: what is YOUR evidence, keys? If not the Bible, then what?
I don't, any more than you do. I think all evidence agrees.
You're right, the evidence DOES all agree. On an Earth billions of years old. On Evolution. NOT on the things this "museum" teaches.
Some people have thought that drugs may have opened doors on the spiritual, do you have some evidence, besides personal incredulity that some of the experiences of man are not real?
You're the one asserting that something supernatural exists. Do you have any evidence, besides irrational gullibility, that these "Experiences" were anything more than chemically induced hallucinations based on nothing supernatural whatsoever? I can't prove a negative, the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. What's YOUR evidence?

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by simple, posted 06-11-2007 11:23 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 12:38 AM Rahvin has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 197 of 303 (405241)
06-11-2007 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by jar
06-11-2007 11:17 PM


Re: Exhibits raised by you?
Different than the ones mentioned in the OP?
"First we had the one in the US. Now, another one in Canada. I would not be surprised if many in different states and countries opened up over the next decade or so.
I think this is a good thing. A great thing. Long overdue."
Don't think so, it was from the US one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by jar, posted 06-11-2007 11:17 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by jar, posted 06-12-2007 12:06 AM simple has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 198 of 303 (405244)
06-11-2007 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Rahvin
06-11-2007 11:01 PM


Re: Age of the Earth, in simple steps
quote:
Wow...here 4 days and already accusing the mods of bias?
You think saying, 'I will wait to see how it plays out, whether there is evenhandedness or not' is accusing anyone of anything?? Maybe you should work on your english.
quote:
Now...could you kindly return to the topic and actually address what someone posts, rather than dodging questions and appealing to bias?
All depends on what they post, if it is topical, and whether I perceive manners.
Edited by keys, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Rahvin, posted 06-11-2007 11:01 PM Rahvin has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 199 of 303 (405246)
06-12-2007 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 197 by simple
06-11-2007 11:55 PM


Re: Exhibits raised by you?
keys writes:
Don't think so, it was from the US one.
LOL. Right. Now what is the title of the thread?
Hint: "Creationism museum opens in Alberta"
What does Jesus resurrection have to do with Creation Museums?
If the goal is to teach folk about Jesus and the concept that GOD created all that is, seen and unseen, why include material that is totally refuted and false like a 6000 year old universe or the Great Wetting that Never Happened?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by simple, posted 06-11-2007 11:55 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 12:27 AM jar has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 200 of 303 (405247)
06-12-2007 12:25 AM
Reply to: Message 195 by Rahvin
06-11-2007 11:31 PM


Re: BeingChristian does not mean you must remain ignorant.
quote:
Bare assertion. WHAT EXACTLY, other than the observable, natural universe, exists, and more importantly, how do you know it exists?
Well more importantly, how do you know it doesn't exist? The way we know it does exist, is not by your limited science, I think I can safely say. So why would science be able to say it did not??
quote:
That is correct, I do not believe in any supernatural entity, god or otherwise. This is not irrational - absence of evidence is in fact evidence of absence.
That is fine, but why would others that feel they have experienced and observed things supernatural limit their belief to yours for no apparent reason, other than your inability to get beyond your limited range of perceptions? The only thing your absence of natural evidence for a supernatural exhibits, is being absent from your natural range. That would be expected for things not natural would it not? Or do you think you can also detect things spiritual now?
quote:
If you have absolutely zero evidence of any specific supernatural entity, what rational reason do you have to believe it exists? More particularly, why would you believe int he Christian deity, and not Thor and every other deity anyone has ever come up with? Why not believe in Santa Claus? What "supernatural instruments" would you have us utilize to give us a reason to believe in the supernatural?
People of different beliefs in things supernatural have different reasons for that, none of which you can dispose of by science, or by wishful thinking. You don't need to worry about instruments other than natural, cause that is all you believe in. Neither should you worry about those that do detect evidence of it, just because you can't. Stick to your little forte.
quote:
You're kidding, right? We're talking about a Creationist museum! The position of Creationism is that the Christian God created the Earth in 6 days, roughly 6000 years ago.
That is also my position. But I don't remember anyone referencing an exhibit about that.
quote:
The same reason I'm really, really freaking sure there's no invisible pink unicorn standing over my shoulder. And the fact that this is a debate forum.
But no one claims any unicorn, or that this forum does not exist, so how can that be the freakin proof for your position of personal incredulity?
quote:
So, since you didn't answer the question, I'll ask again: how can you, keys, tell the difference between something completely made up, like an invisible pink unicorn, and a real but undetectable supernatural entity like the Christian God? What differentiates "supernatural" from "non-existent?"
That depends on who is the observer. If it is a non believer, then the answer is NOTHING! They have no clue. If you are talking about a bible believer, why, one would assume that the bible would help set the guidelines there. So, if you claim some pink entity is hovering over me, I would ask where there was such a thing in the bible. If you were serious, I would simply say I couldn't care less, let it hover, why would I care? I likely would not claim that I knew there was not really something there, since I would be ignorant of it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Rahvin, posted 06-11-2007 11:31 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Rahvin, posted 06-12-2007 12:42 AM simple has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 201 of 303 (405248)
06-12-2007 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by jar
06-12-2007 12:06 AM


Re: Exhibits raised by you?
The topic was in the OP, not just the title. It mentioned the US as well. The exhibit I posted was from the US museum, deal with it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by jar, posted 06-12-2007 12:06 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by jar, posted 06-12-2007 12:34 AM simple has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 202 of 303 (405249)
06-12-2007 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 201 by simple
06-12-2007 12:27 AM


Re: Exhibits raised by you?
You still need to show how it is relevant to the topic of "Creation Museums".
If the goal is to teach folk about Jesus and the concept that GOD created all that is, seen and unseen, why include material that is totally refuted and false like a 6000 year old universe or the Great Wetting that Never Happened?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 12:27 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 12:48 AM jar has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 203 of 303 (405250)
06-12-2007 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by Rahvin
06-11-2007 11:40 PM


quote:
My apologies - I've been forced to speculate that you are a Bible-believing Christian based solely on the fact that you posted a picture of Jesus resurrection and have accepted that as a fact, because you've refused to give us anything else. I'll ask, yet again: what is YOUR evidence, keys? If not the Bible, then what?
For the resurrection?? Or, for 'all I know', as you put it? I do use the bible for some things, yes. One thing it does do is record the resurrection. It talks about the witnessed event. Times, places, circumstances etc. That is evidence. Like it or not, and evidence it will stay. Not in the science forum of this site, no. But who cares about that?
quote:
You're the one asserting that something supernatural exists. Do you have any evidence, besides irrational gullibility, that these "Experiences" were anything more than chemically induced hallucinations based on nothing supernatural whatsoever? I can't prove a negative, the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. What's YOUR evidence?
You assert it does not exist, where is your evidence? Millions of people have had miracles, and other manifestations of things spiritual. That is evidence! The fact you haven't seen it does not change that. It may not be the kind of evidence you might want in science of the natural, but, too bad!
ev·i·dence (v-dns)
n.
1. A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place. Scientists weigh the evidence for and against a hypothesis.
2. Something indicative; an outward sign: evidence of grief on a mourner's face.
3. Law The documentary or oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law.
tr.v. ev·i·denced, ev·i·denc·ing, ev·i·denc·es
1. To indicate clearly; exemplify or prove.
2. To support by testimony; attest.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Rahvin, posted 06-11-2007 11:40 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by Rahvin, posted 06-12-2007 12:54 AM simple has not replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 204 of 303 (405251)
06-12-2007 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by simple
06-12-2007 12:25 AM


Re: BeingChristian does not mean you must remain ignorant.
Well more importantly, how do you know it doesn't exist? The way we know it does exist, is not by your limited science, I think I can safely say. So why would science be able to say it did not??
Exactly how many more times are you going to refuse to answer questions? "The way we know...is not by your limited science." So how DO you know? What is the evidence that caused your belief? I've asked at least three times now. Stop dodging.
And if you honestly think that not being able to conclusively prove something is nonexistent means it is at all likely to exist, you need to do some serious thinking. You cannot absolutely prove that the invisible pink unicorn isn't standing over my shoulder. What is the difference between that statement, and your statement that I cannot prove the supernatural does not exist?
That is fine, but why would others that feel they have experienced and observed things supernatural limit their belief to yours for no apparent reason, other than your inability to get beyond your limited range of perceptions? The only thing your absence of natural evidence for a supernatural exhibits, is being absent from your natural range. That would be expected for things not natural would it not? Or do you think you can also detect things spiritual now?
You are the only one claiming anything spiritual exists. If I cannot detect it in any way, shape, or form, then why would I believe it? If you believe things without detecting any evidence of their existence, why do you not believe in the invisible pink unicorn? Stop trying to shift the burden of proof. You've done this repeatedly, and it;s not an honest debate tactic. You have claimed that the supernatural exists. I have repeatedly asked for the reason you believe it exists. Any further response without answering this very simple question will be accepted as your concession.
People of different beliefs in things supernatural have different reasons for that, none of which you can dispose of by science, or by wishful thinking. You don't need to worry about instruments other than natural, cause that is all you believe in. Neither should you worry about those that do detect evidence of it, just because you can't. Stick to your little forte.
So, what...you're saying that the "faithful" have magic glasses that let them see the supernatural, and that a bunch of them just happened to take what they saw completely differently?
I don;t care how many people believe in the supernatural, keys. I want to hear why they believe. What is your reason If there is no reason, no evidence, then your argument is hollow.
That is also my position. But I don't remember anyone referencing an exhibit about that.
...it's a topic about a Creationist museum. Your dodging of questions is dishonest. Stop it. You know as well as I do that the museum, being Creationist, supports a 600 year old Earth, etc.
But no one claims any unicorn, or that this forum does not exist, so how can that be the freakin proof for your position of personal incredulity?
You seriously don;t understand the concept of a comparison, do you. How's this. I'm really freaking sure there is no invisible ghost looking over my shoulder. I'm really freaking sure the CIA is not beaming thoughts into my head. Without any evidence, there is no reason to believe in any claim. Your claim of the supernatural is no different. You;ve been asked for the evidence, just the barest reason, no matter how personal, and you've repeatedly, dishonestly avoided answering.
That depends on who is the observer. If it is a non believer, then the answer is NOTHING! They have no clue. If you are talking about a bible believer, why, one would assume that the bible would help set the guidelines there. So, if you claim some pink entity is hovering over me, I would ask where there was such a thing in the bible. If you were serious, I would simply say I couldn't care less, let it hover, why would I care? I likely would not claim that I knew there was not really something there, since I would be ignorant of it.
So, your answer is that the Bible is how you tell the difference? Why that specific collection of old books? Why not the Quoran? Why not the writings of the ancient Greeks or Romans? Why not the Egyptian Book of the Dead?
Why not Nancy Drew? Why not Dianetics?

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 12:25 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 1:10 AM Rahvin has replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 205 of 303 (405252)
06-12-2007 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by jar
06-12-2007 12:34 AM


Re: Exhibits raised by you?
quote:
You still need to show how it is relevant to the topic of "Creation Museums".
Since it is part of an exhibit IN a real creation museum, how could it be anything BUT relevant? Think about it.
quote:
If the goal is to teach folk about Jesus and the concept that GOD created all that is, seen and unseen, why include material that is totally refuted and false like a 6000 year old universe or the Great Wetting that Never Happened?
Well, apparently they do not think it is refuted. Apparently you do. The flood itself I believe, and millions of other as well, really happened. Now, some of the science may be off, and even wrong in the mainstream of creationism, I will grant that. But I will grant the same for things you might believe in 'science'. Ever notice science has changed somewhat since, say, the 1940ies?
Keep in mind that what these things were supposedly refuted with, is just natural science. If there is more, then, that is meaningless. And, after all, you cannot say whether there is more, or not. Now can you? I offer YOU as my evidence!!!
You claimed to be a Christian, that means you must believe in the resurrection, and God!!! Why?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by jar, posted 06-12-2007 12:34 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by molbiogirl, posted 06-12-2007 12:57 AM simple has not replied
 Message 209 by jar, posted 06-12-2007 1:02 AM simple has replied
 Message 212 by molbiogirl, posted 06-12-2007 1:22 AM simple has not replied
 Message 245 by Jaderis, posted 06-12-2007 6:52 AM simple has not replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 206 of 303 (405253)
06-12-2007 12:52 AM
Reply to: Message 188 by simple
06-11-2007 10:48 PM


Oh for the love of his noodley appendage!
I offered a few exhibits to try and show that more was at issue than just science in these places.
Are you referring to this?
And this?
I noticed this exhibit from the creation museum.
You noticed an exhibit?
That's your evidence?
Offer some evidence! Any evidence!
And then, on top of everything else, you throw down the gauntlet
List 2 known lies in the museum, so we can see what you mean.
and when both RAZD and Rahvin rise to the bait, you dodge with this?
as I actually would like to do that, I am not yet confident of the fairness of the moderators here
You just added two fallacies to your list!
Argumentum ad nauseam (argument to the point of disgust). The fallacy of trying to prove something by saying it again and again. Of course, it is not fallacious to state the truth again and again; what is fallacious is to expect the repetition alone to substitute for real arguments.
Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance). The fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false.
Congratulations, keys! That's 4 logical fallacies in the space of less than 10 posts! Care to try for five?
Again. keys.
You have asserted that there is evidence of god.
The burden of proof is on you.
You have made the bare assertion that Jesus rose from the dead.
The burden of proof is on you.
"Look! A picture!" is not evidence.
"All my friends think so!" is not evidence.
I'm beginning to think you don't want to discuss anything.
Prove me wrong, keys. I'm begging you. Prove me wrong.
Don't want to discuss those icky science questions?
Fabulous!
Let's stick to jebus.
Now.
You were saying?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by simple, posted 06-11-2007 10:48 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 1:38 AM molbiogirl has replied

Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 207 of 303 (405255)
06-12-2007 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by simple
06-12-2007 12:38 AM


For the resurrection?? Or, for 'all I know', as you put it? I do use the bible for some things, yes. One thing it does do is record the resurrection. It talks about the witnessed event. Times, places, circumstances etc. That is evidence. Like it or not, and evidence it will stay. Not in the science forum of this site, no. But who cares about that?
Just because you're in a faith and belief forum doesn't mean you get a free pass by invoking the Bible. We debate Faith and Belief here - which includes questioning it, and demanding reasoning. Asking why you believe in the Bible and not some other holy text is a perfectly legitimate question here.
A book CANNOT be evidence of itself. That's idiotic. Refer to my Nancy Drew comparison. If the Nancy Drew series says x mystery was solved by Nancy, does that mean Nancy ever existed? Are all books non-fiction? Because that's what it means when books are evidence of their own contents.
Many Christians, perhaps even most, do NOT accept the Bible as literal truth. Why do you?
You assert it does not exist, where is your evidence? Millions of people have had miracles, and other manifestations of things spiritual. That is evidence! The fact you haven't seen it does not change that. It may not be the kind of evidence you might want in science of the natural, but, too bad!
Jesus christ. You assert that the supernatural exists. I responded that I don't believe it does, and asked for your evidence, your reason for believing that it does, since you have already agreed that it's undetectable. The burden of proof lies with you, because you claim something exists. How many times must this be said?
And I'm well aware of the definition of the word "evidence," thank you. I'd really appreciate it if you would provide some.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 12:38 AM simple has not replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 208 of 303 (405256)
06-12-2007 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by simple
06-12-2007 12:48 AM


Ding ding ding ding ding!!!
That's five!
Congratulations, Mr. keys, you've done it!
The flood itself I believe, and millions of other as well, really happened.
Another bare assertion with no supporting evidence!
What has he won, Johnny?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 12:48 AM simple has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 209 of 303 (405257)
06-12-2007 1:02 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by simple
06-12-2007 12:48 AM


Re: Exhibits raised by you?
Since it is part of an exhibit IN a real creation museum, how could it be anything BUT relevant? Think about it.
LOL. It's there for the same reason the carny had a bearded lady and the sword swallower. It helps bring in the rubes.
No, that does not answer the question of how it is relevant.
So one more time, "How is some display of an empty tomb relevant to the issue of Biblical Creation Museums?"
Well, apparently they do not think it is refuted. Apparently you do. The flood itself I believe, and millions of other as well, really happened. Now, some of the science may be off, and even wrong in the mainstream of creationism, I will grant that. But I will grant the same for things you might believe in 'science'. Ever notice science has changed somewhat since, say, the 1940ies?
Of course the conclusions change as we learn more and more. But that has nothing to do with the FACT that both a Young Universe and The Great Wetting have been completely refuted.
Those are not subject to opinions, they are facts.
Keep in mind that what these things were supposedly refuted with, is just natural science. If there is more, then, that is meaningless.
Nonesense. Even if there is a GOD that created the universe, it does not refute the physical evidence.
Look up at the skies at night. The stars are there. The Galaxies are there.
But also stop and consider the theological implications of what you are saying. If either the Universe really were Young or the Great Wetting actually happened, the the person responsible, ie:God, later left false clues that all show that neither are true. In other words, if the Universe is Young or there was a world-wide flood, then God is a liar and trickster.
You claimed to be a Christian, that means you must believe in the resurrection, and God!!! Why?
You can find my reasoning all over EvC. Start in Columnists Corner.
BUT...
whether or not I believe in GOD and the resurrection is irrelevant to the issue. Neither of those have anything to do with how old the Universe is or if there ever was a world-wide flood.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 12:48 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by simple, posted 06-12-2007 1:21 AM jar has not replied

simple 
Inactive Member


Message 210 of 303 (405259)
06-12-2007 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by Rahvin
06-12-2007 12:42 AM


Re: BeingChristian does not mean you must remain ignorant.
quote:
Exactly how many more times are you going to refuse to answer questions? "The way we know...is not by your limited science." So how DO you know? What is the evidence that caused your belief? I've asked at least three times now. Stop dodging.
The topic is not me, it is museums. I know for reasons in my life, as millions of others do. I don't need to get personal here. The fact is we, the millions and millions of believers do have reasons in our lives, many times it is even miracles. We know by experience. Observations. Miracles, and a million other ways. That is how we know. And all these things we know, unbelievers cannot know, unless they become believers. Otherwise how could you know, since science can't help??
quote:
And if you honestly think that not being able to conclusively prove something is nonexistent means it is at all likely to exist, you need to do some serious thinking. You cannot absolutely prove that the invisible pink unicorn isn't standing over my shoulder. What is the difference between that statement, and your statement that I cannot prove the supernatural does not exist?
You could say the singularity is whispering in your ear if you like, and Ned is in drag. That is not my business. If you claimed that was science, why, then we might ask you to give more than a claim.
quote:
You are the only one claiming anything spiritual exists. If I cannot detect it in any way, shape, or form, then why would I believe it? If you believe things without detecting any evidence of their existence, why do you not believe in the invisible pink unicorn? Stop trying to shift the burden of proof. You've done this repeatedly, and it;s not an honest debate tactic. You have claimed that the supernatural exists. I have repeatedly asked for the reason you believe it exists. Any further response without answering this very simple question will be accepted as your concession.
Actually, most of the world agrees with me. More correctly, by numbers you are the only one claiming it doesn't, and offer no evidence but you lack of ability to see!
See, in a faith forum, one can have faith. One does not need to pretend it is science. But, on the other hand, if one claims that science precludes all things supernatural, why, one must back that up, mustn't one?
quote:
So, what...you're saying that the "faithful" have magic glasses that let them see the supernatural, and that a bunch of them just happened to take what they saw completely differently?
I don;t care how many people believe in the supernatural, keys. I want to hear why they believe. What is your reason If there is no reason, no evidence, then your argument is hollow.
You 'want' to hear why they believe. Well, what can I do for you here? Perhaps have a nice long walk about, and really chat it up with a lot of people of faith, and see what you come up with??
quote:
...it's a topic about a Creationist museum. Your dodging of questions is dishonest. Stop it. You know as well as I do that the museum, being Creationist, supports a 600 year old Earth, etc.
No, it supports an earth about 10 times older than that! (har har)
quote:
You seriously don;t understand the concept of a comparison, do you. How's this. I'm really freaking sure there is no invisible ghost looking over my shoulder. I'm really freaking sure the CIA is not beaming thoughts into my head. Without any evidence, there is no reason to believe in any claim. Your claim of the supernatural is no different. You;ve been asked for the evidence, just the barest reason, no matter how personal, and you've repeatedly, dishonestly avoided answering.
Well, I contest you are not freakin sure there is no ghost peeking over your shoulder. Prove it. Otherwise stick to what you are sure of.
You can have no evidence of the supernatural unless you come to God and ask for it, in my opinion. Having a pass to Livermore just won't do it.
quote:
So, your answer is that the Bible is how you tell the difference? Why that specific collection of old books? Why not the Quoran? Why not the writings of the ancient Greeks or Romans? Why not the Egyptian Book of the Dead?
Why not Nancy Drew? Why not Dianetics?
Because we are all entitled to our beliefs, and the belief that I found most historical, evidenced, and present and observed, and working was the God of the bible, and His son.
Many of the people that start these museums feel much the same way. We do not like being called animals, and having you claim that we started off as a singularity. We do not like you pretending there are no angels, and God, and supernatural, when you speak from only ignorance. You can't know that, and should have the decency to admit it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Rahvin, posted 06-12-2007 12:42 AM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by Rahvin, posted 06-12-2007 1:35 AM simple has replied
 Message 214 by molbiogirl, posted 06-12-2007 1:37 AM simple has replied
 Message 226 by Vacate, posted 06-12-2007 2:36 AM simple has replied
 Message 243 by Jaderis, posted 06-12-2007 6:40 AM simple has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024