|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolution or Creation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
with your parents and grandparents committed adherents of one of these religions, But my parents and grandparents were not committed. They were all saved and committed many years after I was saved. "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Uh, no. It wasn't science's fault, nor the hoax's fault, if anyone had decided to stop believing in God. I was not refering to people that already believed in God but people that were born after the hoax and was told it was the missing link therby believing in man evolving from nothing and never giving God a thought. Remember this hoax lasted 41 years. But like I said if there is no God it didn't make any difference. "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I was not refering to people that already believed in God but people that were born after the hoax and was told it was the missing link therby believing in man evolving from nothing and never giving God a thought. Remember this hoax lasted 41 years. But like I said if there is no God it didn't make any difference. But possible relevance can the hoax have? There are literally millions of missing links, man evolved from some primitive critter, likely single celled. What does that have to do with GOD? Evolution is a fact. Denying that Evolution is a fact and that the Theory of Evolution is the best explanation to date for Evolution is an just silly. In the words of the Clergy Project:
To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. Evolution is TRUTH. Biblical Creationism is a LIE! Again, from the Clergy Project:
We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. By supporting Biblical Creationism you are rejecting the will of GOD. Again:
To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. You are placing a limit on GOD, instead of worshiping GOD, you are creating a God in YOUR image. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3911 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
I am saying that since it says "IN THE BEGINNING", That time could have been any time in the past. Which is why the world was most certainly created last Thursday. Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5930 Joined: Member Rating: 5.8 |
dwise1 writes: Uh, no. It wasn't science's fault, nor the hoax's fault, if anyone had decided to stop believing in God. I was not refering to people that already believed in God but people that were born after the hoax and was told it was the missing link therby believing in man evolving from nothing and never giving God a thought. Remember this hoax lasted 41 years. But like I said if there is no God it didn't make any difference.
OK, you did say that in message 191, to which I was responding:
ICANT writes: Now if I am correct that there is a God and a Heaven to gain and a Hell to avoid. Many of those people may go to Hell because of the hoax. Because they took it as the missing link and refused to believe God. But what was the cause of that line, "Because they took it as the missing link and refused to believe God." What's the connection? Why would anyone believe that a missing link would require them to not believe [in] God? Does science say that? No! Does anti-evolution religious rhetorics say that? Oh ja, you betcha! That was my point. So if you are responding to my post, then address my point! Basically, you've got three groups of people affected by Piltdown:1. Believers who refuse to look at the facts. They don't investigate, but rather reject everything out-of-hand that doesn't agree with their beliefs. Their rejection of Piltdown was because it was a missing link; it was only after scientists had exposed it as a hoax that they then switched to rejecting it because it was a hoax. 2. Believers who are willing to examine the facts. In this case, they fell for the hoax and they lost their faith because that is what their religion had taught them that they must do. 3. Non-believers who accepted Piltdown at face value and, because the religionists fervently preached that accepting evolution requires rejection of God, took the religionists at face value and rejected God. When people do exactly what you teach them they must do, basic common courtesy calls for you to not make such a show of outrage and surprise. If Piltdown caused anyone, believer or non-believer, to turn away from God, then the fault is that of what religion taught. The fault does not lie with what science teaches. Because science does not say anything about God, nor can it, nor does it claim to. You should read some of the essays that Dr. Allan H. Harvey, a working physicist and a practicing Christian, wrote for his Sunday School classes: No webpage found at provided URL: http://members.aol.com/steamdoc/writings.htm. In "Science and Christian Apologetics" (No webpage found at provided URL: http://members.aol.com/steamdoc/writings/apologetics.html) he tells of a co-worker from Taiwan, Albert, a non-believer just as you described:
quote: If you are so concerned about non-believers being misled into refusing to believe in God, then why do you insist on continuing to mislead them? PSOn the matter of children raised on "creation science" being especially vulnerable, we have a PowerPoint slide that Kent Hovind would use (from his seminar tape 4, at 42 minutes, 55 seconds): quote: No idea where they got their statistics from, nor what kind of a spin they tried to put on it. For actual cases, visit ex-YEC Glenn Morton's page of personal stories and testimonials at No webpage found at provided URL: http://home.entouch.net/dmd/person.htm. Steve Smith's story is a good example:
quote: When will the scales fall from your eyes, that you may begin to see? Edited by dwise1, : PS
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
You made an insulting and serious accusation of widespread scientific fraud, such that many Biologists must be conspiring to falsify their data in order to promote a shared social agenda. Support this claim or withdraw it. Message 176I am saying there have been many frauds that have been caught. How many are there that have not been caught. I asked you to stop putting words in my mouth. I hope the following examples satisfy you if they don't go find your own all you have to do is type evolution fraud into yahoo search and you can find 306,000 sites. Google gives 2,220,000 sites. Evolution Fraud and MythsWe already had Piltdown man. Nebraska man: A single tooth, discovered in Nebraska in 1922 grew an entire evolutionary link between man and monkey, until another identical tooth was found which was protruding from the jawbone of a wild pig. Java man: Initially discovered by Dutchman Eugene Dubois in 1891, all that was found of this claimed originator of humans was a skullcap, three teeth and a femur. The femur was found 50 feet away from the original skullcap a full year later. For almost 30 years Dubois downplayed the Wadjak skulls (two undoubtedly human skulls found very close to his "missing link"). (source: Hank Hanegraaff, The Face That Demonstrates The Farce Of Evolution, [Word Publishing, Nashville, 1998], pp.50-52) Orce man: Found in the southern Spanish town of Orce in 1982, and hailed as the oldest fossilized human remains ever found in Europe. One year later officials admitted the skull fragment was not human but probably came from a 4 month old donkey. Scientists had said the skull belonged to a 17 year old man who lived 900,000 to 1.6 million years ago, and even had very detail drawings done to represent what he would have looked like. (source: "Skull fragment may not be human", Knoxville News-Sentinel, 1983) Neanderthal: Still synonymous with brutishness, the first Neanderthal remains were found in France in 1908. Considered to be ignorant, ape-like, stooped and knuckle-dragging, much of the evidence now suggests that Neanderthal was just as human as us, and his stooped appearance was because of arthritis and rickets. Neanderthals are now recognized as skilled hunters, believers in an after-life, and even skilled surgeons, as seen in one skeleton whose withered right arm had been amputated above the elbow. (source: "Upgrading Neanderthal Man", Time Magazine, May 17, 1971, Vol. 97, No. 20) Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny?Haekel's faked embryonic drawings The theory of embryonic recapitulation asserts that the human fetus goes through various stages of its evolutionary history as it develops. Ernst Haeckel proposed this theory in the late 1860's, promoting Darwin's theory of evolution in Germany. He made detailed drawings of the embryonic development of eight different embryos in three stages of development, to bolster his claim. His work was hailed as a great development in the understanding of human evolution. A few years later his drawings were shown to have been fabricated, and the data manufactured. He blamed the artist for the discrepancies, without admitting that he was the artist. (source: Russell Grigg, "Fraud Rediscovered", Creation, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.49-51) Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis:Fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor The most recent and perhaps the most infamous evolution frauds was committed in China and published in 1999 in the journal National Geographic 196:98-107, November 1999. Dinosaur bones were put together with the bones of a newer species of bird and they tried to pass it off as a very important new evolutionary intermediate. "Feathers For T-Rex?", Christopher P. Sloan, National Geographic Magazine, Vol. 196, No. 5, November, 1999, pp.99,100,105 Interesting Quote - "National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism" Storrs L. Olson, Smithsonian Institution Brontosaurus: One of the best known dinosaurs in books and museums for the past hundred years, brontosaurus never really existed. The dinosaur's skeleton was found with the head missing. To complete it, a skull found three or four miles away was added. No one knew this for years. The body actually belonged to a species of Diplodocus and the head was from an Apatosaurus. (source: Paul S. Taylor, The Great Dinosaur Mystery and the Bible, [Chariot Victor Publishing, 1989], pp.12-13) http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/molecular_biology_09.html
The most generally respected study on the origin of life is the Miller experiment conducted by the American researcher Stanley Miller in 1953. (The experiment is also known as the "Urey-Miller experiment" because of the contribution of Miller's instructor at the University of Chicago, Harold Urey.) This experiment is the only "evidence" evolutionists have with which to allegedly prove the "chemical evolution thesis"; they advance it as the first stage of the supposed evolutionary process leading to life. Although nearly half a century has passed, and great technological advances have been made, nobody has made any further progress. In spite of this, Miller's experiment is still taught in textbooks as the evolutionary explanation of the earliest generation of living things. That is because, aware of the fact that such studies do not support, but rather actually refute, their thesis, evolutionist researchers deliberately avoid embarking on such experiments. Today, Miller's experiment is totally disregarded even by evolutionist scientists. In the February 1998 issue of the famous evolutionist science journal Earth, the following statements appear in an article titled "Life's Crucible": Geologist now think that the primordial atmosphere consisted mainly of carbon dioxide and nitrogen, gases that are less reactive than those used in the 1953 experiment. And even if Miller's atmosphere could have existed, how do you get simple molecules such as amino acids to go through the necessary chemical changes that will convert them into more complicated compounds, or polymers, such as proteins? Miller himself throws up his hands at that part of the puzzle. "It's a problem," he sighs with exasperation. "How do you make polymers? That's not so easy."259 In brief, neither Miller's experiment, nor any other similar one that has been attempted, can answer the question of how life emerged on earth. All of the research that has been done shows that it is impossible for life to emerge by chance, and thus confirms that life is created. The reason evolutionists do not accept this obvious reality is their blind adherence to prejudices that are totally unscientific. Interestingly enough, Harold Urey, who organized the Miller experiment with his student Stanley Miller, made the following confession on this subject:All of us who study the origin of life find that the more we look into it, the more we feel it is too complex to have evolved anywhere. We all believe as an article of faith that life evolved from dead matter on this planet. It is just that its complexity is so great, it is hard for us to imagine that it did.261 The Evolution of the Horse exhibition in London's Natural History Museum. This and other "evolution of the horse" diagrams show independent species which lived at different times and in different places, lined up one after the other in a very subjective presentation. In reality, there are no scientific discoveries regarding the evolution of the horse.The evolutionist science writer Gordon R. Taylor explains this little-acknowledged truth in his book The Great Evolution Mystery: But perhaps the most serious weakness of Darwinism is the failure of paleontologists to find convincing phylogenies or sequences of organisms demonstrating major evolutionary change... The horse is often cited as the only fully worked-out example. But the fact is that the line from Eohippus to Equus is very erratic. It is alleged to show a continual increase in size, but the truth is that some variants were smaller than Eohippus, not larger. Specimens from different sources can be brought together in a convincing-looking sequence, but there is no evidence that they were actually ranged in this order in time.156 http://www.amnh.org/...sures/Evolution_of_Horses/horses.html
Cladistics, which the Museum has played an important role in developing, is the grouping of organisms by shared, specialized characteristics; each time a new evolutionary feature appears, a new branch grows on the evolutionary tree, comprising organisms that have both the old traits and the new one. Thus the display in the back shows that some later horses, such as Calippus, are actually smaller than earlier ones, and that other later horses, such as Neohipparion, still had three toes. This display is therefore both a classic demonstration of evolution and a paradigm of scientific method at the Museum. LUCY:http://www.omniology.com/LucySkeletons.html
8 UN-ETHICAL EXAMPLES OF ACADEMIC LICENSE OR FRAUD BY SELF AGGRANDIZING (MACRO-EVOLUTIONARY) "EXPERTS" WHO HOLD THEIR INTERPRETATIONS TO BE INFALLIBLY TRUE. http://www.bible.ca/tracks/textbook-fraud-biologist.htm
J: "Just stop right there. To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold on to two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don't believe in evolution. All government work, research grants, papers, big college lectures - everything would stop. I'd be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn't earn a decent living." Dead MothsGlued To The Trees![And More Evolution Frauds Exposed!]
How did they get on the trees for the photos and films? Two ways, both more dishonest than the Piltdown man hoax: 1) They were LABORATORY-BRED. The moths filmed being eaten by the birds were placed onto tree trunks by Kettlewell; they were so languid that he once had to warm them up on the hood of his car. 2) DEAD moths were GLUED to the trees! U-Mass biologist Theodore Sargent confessed to the dirty deed for a NOVA documentary. He also admitted that textbooks and films have featured "a lot of fraudulent photographs" http://biobulletin.amnh.org/D/2/3/index.html
Where did modern horses come from? Modern species of horses, such as the common horse, Equus caballus, evolved on the North American continent and migrated across the Bering land bridge into what is now Siberia. From there, horses spread across Asia into Europe and south to the Middle East and northern Africa. At the end of the Pleistocene epoch”about 10,000 years ago”a set of devastating extinctions took place in North and South America. Many large mammal species died out on the American continents, including mammoths, saber-tooth tigers, and all horse species. (The cause of these extinctions is unknown. Page Not Found | UCI School of Humanities% 20Lecture.doc Closer to home, and to our quarter, is the Meadowcroft Rockshelter in Avella, PA, evidence of human occupation that is 14,000-17,000 yrs. Old; Cactus Hill, VA, where tools have been discovere in layers 15,050 years old; etc. Since the middle of North America was still covered by glacier until about 11,500 yrs. ago, these people could not have crossed the continent. Speculation is now that these people came from the Solutrean culture of France and the Iberian Peninsula, roughly following the a northern route along the edge of a glacer past Greenland and down from Newfoundland, roughly the same route as Norseman Lief Erikson around 1,000 AD If many large mammal species died out on the American continents, including mammoths, saber-tooth tigers, and all horse species.How did man survive? If man survived why did not the horses? If horses had been tamed for 20,000 years, did these humans not have tame horses? Just food for thought. "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Your testimonies on this thread look like attempts to better your bargaining position. You candidly admit you could 'just as easily' believe something else. If I said I could just as easily believe something else then I retract that statement. I will state below what I believe and hope that ADMINPD will allow it to stay long enough for you to read it. You say I am seeking a better bargaining position. First off I don't have anything to bargain with. I am a human being with a sin nature in me. As Paul said "even when I would do good evil is present with me." Isaiah said "my best is as filthy rags in the sight of God". I am in the same boat if not worse than these two great men. Now my testimony: I believe God.I believe God created the heaven and the earth in time past. (date undetermined). I believe that before He did this God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit determined they would make man in their image. And because man would sin there had to be a sacrifice for my sin. God the Son agreed to be that sacrifice. I believe many things happened.Then one day Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. (science has proved that this is possible) I believe at the age of 30 years old He began His personal ministry on earth. I believe that His ministry lasted 3 1/2 years. During which time many miracles were performed. I believe that the religious groups Pharisees and Saddusees contrived a plan to have Christ crucified. I believe He was buried. I believe 72 hrs later He walked out of that tomb. I believe that He was seen on at least 7 different occasions by His disciples. I believe He ascended to heaven to make intercession for my sins. I believe that man is saved by grace alone. I believe that grace is God's unmerited favor. There is no act or deed that we can do to merit this grace. I believe that man without the shed blood of Jesus applied to his spirit will spend a conscience eternity in the lake of fire with the devil and the false prophets. I believe that every person whose name is not recorded in the book of life will be cast into the lake of fire. I believe that all a person has to do to go to the lake of fire is be born, live and die. I believe that for man to go to heaven he must realize he is a sinner and is not worthy of heaven on his own. When he has done this he then puts his faith and trust in God to do what God said He would do if man will only believe Him. quote:I believe Jesus is coming again. I believe there is a heaven. I believe there will be a new heaven and a new earth. I believe there will be no seas on the new earth. I believe there will be a City The New Jerusalem. It will be 1800 cubic miles in size. The streets will be paved with pure gold. I believe I will live in this city with God. I know that if you could come up with the sum I mentioned 92.5 billion us dollars and offered it to me in exchange for my eternal life, I would say no thank you. I know if you made me an offer of life over death in exchange for my eternal life I would choose death. I choose to believe all these things and I will go to the grave believing them. There are a very few on this forum that can understand what I am saying. Now for the rest of you, you choose to believe what you believe. I know you say no I just follow the evidence. Keep telling yourself that lie. You believe what you believe because you choose to do so. I choose to believe God. You choose to believe man and man's wisdom. But a word of warning, this world is the devil's domain until Jesus comes back and he is very deceitful and is the father of all lies. So can you really believe what you think you see? Isn't it interesting that no one who talks about an afterlife lives in one? Now if I was to tell you that in l965 science said I was dead for 3 hours and 20 minutes, and in that time I saw the City The New Jerusalem and the river of life that flows from the throne of God you would say, I was crazy, went off the deep end, was deluded or many other things you could think of. So I won't tell you that. Many of you have said Atheism has nothing to offer me. You are right.What can you offer a man that has everything. You mention all the worldly goods you never got I thought I said my God had supplied everything I needed. Lets see I have a beautiful waterfront home, a 2007 Entourage van, a 2007 Nissan pickup, and a farm. They are all paid for all I have to pay is the taxes each year to the government to keep them. Apparently you did not read the post where I listed many things I had done because my God had given me several abilities. I did not do those things for free. My God has supplied all these things. Atheism would have given me the following:DrJones told me I could free myself from superstition. Doddy told me I would have more time, I wouldn't be obligted to follow any message of intolerance or ignorance. That I could get along better with atheist. That I could relate to reality better. That I could understand the rest of biology better. And I would be a better steward with God's creation. Stile said Atheism has nothing for you. Ringo said I had been told I would be free from ignorance and prejudice. Would you like to add anything? "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RickJB Member (Idle past 4990 days) Posts: 917 From: London, UK Joined: |
ICANT writes: Where did modern horses come from?Modern species of horses, such as the common horse, Equus caballus, evolved on the North American continent and migrated across the Bering land bridge into what is now Siberia. From there, horses spread across Asia into Europe and south to the Middle East and northern Africa. At the end of the Pleistocene epoch”about 10,000 years ago”a set of devastating extinctions took place in North and South America. Many large mammal species died out on the American continents, including mammoths, saber-tooth tigers, and all horse species. (The cause of these extinctions is unknown. Er, what? The horses that moved into Asia did not go exinct. Is says as much in the paragraph you posted! How exactly is this a problem for the ToE? How exactly does it constitute a "hoax"? Most importantly, how do explain what appears to be a ham-fisted attempt on your part to mischaracterise this information? The rest of your links, by the way, are a collection of the usual PRATTs sourced from crank sites.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RickJB Member (Idle past 4990 days) Posts: 917 From: London, UK Joined: |
ICANT writes: Atheism would have given me the following: DrJones told me I could free myself from superstition.Doddy told me I would have more time, I wouldn't be obligted to follow any message of intolerance or ignorance. That I could get along better with atheist. That I could relate to reality better. That I could understand the rest of biology better. And I would be a better steward with God's creation. Stile said Atheism has nothing for you. Ringo said I had been told I would be free from ignorance and prejudice. Would you like to add anything? How about a beautiful waterfront home, a 2007 Entourage van, a 2007 Nissan pickup, and a farm? After all, none of these will be of much use in the afterlife will they? Edited by RickJB, : No reason given. Edited by RickJB, : No reason given. Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 164 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
ICANT writes: It doesn't have to prove where the first bacteria came from the ToE has to as far as I am concerned. Why is this so?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 734 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
this world is the devil's domain until Jesus comes back and he is very deceitful and is the father of all lies. Watch those pronouns, ICANT. They can get you in trouble.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
ICANT, most of your sources are just plain lies.
At best, they are horribly misinformed. And the ones that are correct you seem to be misreading, like the brontosaurus head issue. There is no fraud or hoax there. They just got it wrong at first and then corrected it when they learned more and got better information. What, scienctists are supposed to have perfect knowledge all the time for you to not accuse them of conspiring to deceive everyone else? If you would like to open a thread to discuss each of the claims in turn, I am sure we could work through them fairly quickly, but there is too much to address here. The question is, do you have the courage to do so?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
ICANT writes: I know that if you could come up with the sum I mentioned 92.5 billion us dollars and offered it to me in exchange for my eternal life, I would say no thank you. You keep bringing this up and saying this as if it should really mean something incredible to anybody. I'd be willing to bet that the large majority of people on this forum would refuse the same offer for much lesser promises than "eternal life". I wouldn't accept that money if someone was going to take my girfriend away.I wouldn't accept that money if someone was going to simply cut off the hand of a stranger to me. Everyone has personal convictions that there is no monetary value that can be placed above them. To think this bribe is showing anyone something they haven't thought of before, or some level of conviction that others don't have is kind of naive.
I know if you made me an offer of life over death in exchange for my eternal life I would choose death. Again, this isn't really anything new to anybody. Almost everyone has some sort of personal conviction that they would choose death before overturning.
There are a very few on this forum that can understand what I am saying. If you feel that people are not understanding you, perhaps you could try explaining what you are saying, then?
Stile said Atheism has nothing for you. No, not really. I've clearly explained what I've meant by that everytime I've said it: IF you want to have promises rather than search for objective truth, THEN your strange notion of "atheism" (some sort of strict version of extreme naturalism) has nothing for you personally, ICANT. Your mis-quote of my ideas is slightly telling. Perhaps it is you who is not understanding what is being said?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5872 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
It would be substantially off-topic to address each of these quotes here (this is Faith and Belief, after all). Pick one that you think is really really relevant and put up a PNT.
BTW: I thought you said that biologists were the ones committing all the fraud (or weren't getting caught, or whatever). There isn't a single biologist listed in any of those quotes. Even though they are all spurious, it appears most of the accusations are being leveled at paleontologists, with one abiogenesis (biochemistry) note. Do you have any actual biology frauds? If not, perhaps you might consider modifiying your original accusation?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
ICANT writes: Lets see I have a beautiful waterfront home, a 2007 Entourage van, a 2007 Nissan pickup, and a farm. quote: quote: Your "testimony" would be much more impressive if you left out the bits about the neat stuff God gives you.
Apparently you did not read the post where I listed many things I had done because my God had given me several abilities. Everybody has abilities. We're not all so insecure that we have to brag about them.
I did not do those things for free. Maybe you should have.Maybe then you'd understand that life isn't all about the almighty dollar. quote: Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024