Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
creation/evolution the video
#26

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 11:43 AM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 10:59 AM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 08:03 PM)Drich Wrote: I have been doing this very thing over the last 20 year using your (atheist) questions and objections resulting in 10's of thousands if not 100s of thousands of pages of dialog on this very subject. this is inpart the reason I have been able to reconcile both a 7 day creation with a bazillion year evolutionary theory.

They aren't "atheist" questions.  They are mere matters of science.  If you want to think of your 7 days as 13+ billion years, that is up to you.  But those sure make some long days...

Actually, if you want a more poetic version of "creation", read the beginning of the 'Silmarillion' by Tolkien.  Equally fictional, but MUCH better written.

One even gets to keep god that is a dick when one will chose Tolkien version. So most fundamental aspect of religion gets preserved.

My point exactly. That's why I pointed out that both are fictional. I merely suggested the Silmarillion was better written.
A friend in need is a pain in the ass. If you are lucky, when he comes around you won't be home!
The following 1 user Likes Cavebear's post:
  • Gwaithmir
Reply
#27

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 11:47 AM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 11:43 AM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 10:59 AM)Cavebear Wrote: They aren't "atheist" questions.  They are mere matters of science.  If you want to think of your 7 days as 13+ billion years, that is up to you.  But those sure make some long days...

Actually, if you want a more poetic version of "creation", read the beginning of the 'Silmarillion' by Tolkien.  Equally fictional, but MUCH better written.

One even gets to keep god that is a dick when one will chose Tolkien version. So most fundamental aspect of religion gets preserved.

My point exactly.  That's why I pointed out that both are fictional.  I merely suggested the Silmarillion was better written.

And I just added that one can still have god that is a dick.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Reply
#28

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:00 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 11:47 AM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 11:43 AM)Szuchow Wrote: One even gets to keep god that is a dick when one will chose Tolkien version. So most fundamental aspect of religion gets preserved.

My point exactly.  That's why I pointed out that both are fictional.  I merely suggested the Silmarillion was better written.

And I just added that one can still have god that is a dick.

OK. Personally, as far as I can tell, every deity ever imagined was a dick. Or a cunt. I suppose it has to go both ways if you have to define "badness" in sexual terms. I don't, but whatever terms you need... Bad is bad.
A friend in need is a pain in the ass. If you are lucky, when he comes around you won't be home!
Reply
#29

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:08 PM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:00 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 11:47 AM)Cavebear Wrote: My point exactly.  That's why I pointed out that both are fictional.  I merely suggested the Silmarillion was better written.

And I just added that one can still have god that is a dick.

OK.  Personally, as far as I can tell, every deity ever imagined was a dick.  Or a cunt.  I suppose it has to go both ways if you have to define "badness" in sexual terms.  I don't, but whatever terms you need...  Bad is bad.

I doubt that humanity did not managed to come with even one good deity. As for sexual terms I usually stick with space Hitler pr genocidal tyrant but dick seems perfectly fitting as descriptor of biblical petty failure of a god.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Reply
#30

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:12 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:08 PM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:00 PM)Szuchow Wrote: And I just added that one can still have god that is a dick.

OK.  Personally, as far as I can tell, every deity ever imagined was a dick.  Or a cunt.  I suppose it has to go both ways if you have to define "badness" in sexual terms.  I don't, but whatever terms you need...  Bad is bad.

I doubt that humanity did not managed to come with even one good deity. As for sexual terms I usually stick with space Hitler pr genocidal tyrant but dick seems perfectly fitting as descriptor of biblical petty failure of a god.

I'm not the one who first said "dick". And I don't like the reference...
A friend in need is a pain in the ass. If you are lucky, when he comes around you won't be home!
Reply
#31

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:16 PM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:12 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:08 PM)Cavebear Wrote: OK.  Personally, as far as I can tell, every deity ever imagined was a dick.  Or a cunt.  I suppose it has to go both ways if you have to define "badness" in sexual terms.  I don't, but whatever terms you need...  Bad is bad.

I doubt that humanity did not managed to come with even one good deity. As for sexual terms I usually stick with space Hitler pr genocidal tyrant but dick seems perfectly fitting as descriptor of biblical petty failure of a god.

I'm not the one who first said "dick".  And I don't like the reference...

So? If the fancy strikes me I will call YHWH not only a dick but also cock, prick or wang.

You don't like the reference? Tough shit I guess.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Reply
#32

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:21 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:16 PM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:12 PM)Szuchow Wrote: I doubt that humanity did not managed to come with even one good deity. As for sexual terms I usually stick with space Hitler pr genocidal tyrant but dick seems perfectly fitting as descriptor of biblical petty failure of a god.

I'm not the one who first said "dick".  And I don't like the reference...

So? If the fancy strikes me I will call YHWH not only a dick but also cock, prick or wang.

You don't like the reference? Tough shit I guess.

Go ahead. It won't bother me any. I'm an atheist. But "dick" and "cunt" are human reductions and I see no use in the terms.

And I really don't care if someone refers to Yaweh, Zeus, Mithros, Christ, Osiris, or Diva. They are all the same to me. Figments of the imagination, ancient representations of fear, or non-existent hoped-for powers.
A friend in need is a pain in the ass. If you are lucky, when he comes around you won't be home!
The following 1 user Likes Cavebear's post:
  • Gwaithmir
Reply
#33

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:36 PM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:21 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:16 PM)Cavebear Wrote: I'm not the one who first said "dick".  And I don't like the reference...

So? If the fancy strikes me I will call YHWH not only a dick but also cock, prick or wang.

You don't like the reference? Tough shit I guess.

Go ahead.  It won't bother me any.  I'm an atheist.  But "dick" and "cunt" are human reductions and I see no use in the terms.

And I really don't care if someone refers to Yaweh, Zeus, Mithros, Christ, Osiris, or Diva.  They are all the same to me.  Figments of the imagination, ancient representations of fear, or non-existent hoped-for powers.

Whatever strikes your fancy I guess.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Reply
#34

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:38 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:36 PM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:21 PM)Szuchow Wrote: So? If the fancy strikes me I will call YHWH not only a dick but also cock, prick or wang.

You don't like the reference? Tough shit I guess.

Go ahead.  It won't bother me any.  I'm an atheist.  But "dick" and "cunt" are human reductions and I see no use in the terms.

And I really don't care if someone refers to Yaweh, Zeus, Mithros, Christ, Osiris, or Diva.  They are all the same to me.  Figments of the imagination, ancient representations of fear, or non-existent hoped-for powers.

Whatever strikes your fancy I guess.

Your point?
A friend in need is a pain in the ass. If you are lucky, when he comes around you won't be home!
Reply
#35

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:40 PM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:38 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(12-07-2019, 12:36 PM)Cavebear Wrote: Go ahead.  It won't bother me any.  I'm an atheist.  But "dick" and "cunt" are human reductions and I see no use in the terms.

And I really don't care if someone refers to Yaweh, Zeus, Mithros, Christ, Osiris, or Diva.  They are all the same to me.  Figments of the imagination, ancient representations of fear, or non-existent hoped-for powers.

Whatever strikes your fancy I guess.

Your point?

You do you.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Reply
#36

creation/evolution the video
(12-06-2019, 08:46 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: This has already all been done.  It is called "Guided Evolution".  Or "Theistic Evolution".

Wikipedia: Francis Collins

"Collins also has written a number of books on science, medicine, and religion, including the New York Times bestseller, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. After leaving the directorship of NHGRI and before becoming director of the NIH, he founded and served as president of The BioLogos Foundation, which promotes discourse on the relationship between science and religion and advocates the perspective that belief in Christianity can be reconciled with acceptance of evolution and science, especially through the advancement of evolutionary creation."

The problem with this is that it assumes God exists.  Collins in his book makes little attempt to deal with atheist arguments that demonstrate the God of the Bible, Quran et al is self contradictory and incoherent and not a viable hypothesis.  And thus it is not a good assumption to assume God exists and has anything to do with evolution.

There are already a jillion youtube videos peddling this as a solution to square evolution with God and Bible, and books.  And theistic evolution has been likewise examined by critics and found wanting.

https://biologos.org/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI...gJXYvD_BwE

Biologos has been around for some time and has not been very successful at demonstrating God exists and has anything to do with Gid, and surely has not been successful with atheists and evolutionary scientists.

kinda the same precept but in the end most of those guys have to bend the bible or change what the bible or the theory says to make it all jive.

Where this differs nothing is changed in the bible. it is a straight reading with one none tradition exception. that is to remove all time lines as none are offered scripturally. this allows for a straight forward reading without the need to change a literal 7 day creation.. IE no compromises to the faith.
Reply
#37

creation/evolution the video
(12-09-2019, 08:07 PM)Drich Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 08:46 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: This has already all been done.  It is called "Guided Evolution".  Or "Theistic Evolution".

Wikipedia: Francis Collins

"Collins also has written a number of books on science, medicine, and religion, including the New York Times bestseller, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. After leaving the directorship of NHGRI and before becoming director of the NIH, he founded and served as president of The BioLogos Foundation, which promotes discourse on the relationship between science and religion and advocates the perspective that belief in Christianity can be reconciled with acceptance of evolution and science, especially through the advancement of evolutionary creation."

The problem with this is that it assumes God exists.  Collins in his book makes little attempt to deal with atheist arguments that demonstrate the God of the Bible, Quran et al is self contradictory and incoherent and not a viable hypothesis.  And thus it is not a good assumption to assume God exists and has anything to do with evolution.

There are already a jillion youtube videos peddling this as a solution to square evolution with God and Bible, and books.  And theistic evolution has been likewise examined by critics and found wanting.

https://biologos.org/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI...gJXYvD_BwE

Biologos has been around for some time and has not been very successful at demonstrating God exists and has anything to do with Gid, and surely has not been successful with atheists and evolutionary scientists.

kinda the same precept but in the end most of those guys have to bend the bible or change what the bible or the theory says to make it all jive.

Where this differs nothing is changed in the bible. it is a straight reading with one none tradition exception. that is to remove all time lines as none are offered scripturally. this allows for a straight forward reading without the need to change a literal 7 day creation.. IE no compromises to the faith.

Nope. Your god hypothesis still doesn't work.    I've read Collins and his claims.  What he's doing is inserting a god in a gap of knowledge.  He makes a claim that god was guiding evolution because he can't think of any other way evolution could have started or progressed.  But here's the catch, he doesn't actually DEMONSTRATE  that a god had anything to do with it. It's just another god claim without any evidence.  

Welp, it's back to the drawing board for you, Drichy.   Whistling
                                                         T4618
The following 3 users Like Dancefortwo's post:
  • Gwaithmir, Full Circle, adey67
Reply
#38

creation/evolution the video
(12-06-2019, 09:02 PM)Dānu Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 07:58 PM)Dānu Wrote: [Image: 121d94d258314323713504305962ef41.jpg]

Nobody needs your help rationalizing away the problems in the bible, Drich, especially Genesis.  The only person this helps is you, and that's because your ego needs constant feeding with attention, good or bad.

I knew what was coming and gave you the benefit of the doubt anyway and listened once again to your moronic ass twaddle on this subject.

For those who aren't complete fucking morons (read: NOT YOU), even without going into detail on the many errors in exegesis, hermeneutics and so on here, ultimately this explanation is nothing more than a, "it could have happened," reconciliation, akin to the meme noting that nowhere in the bible does it say that Jesus wasn't a velociraptor, so "he could have been."  That means that the only bar which would be met here even if you cleared all the other hurdles your ignorance and stupidity thrust into your path is that of consistency: you've invented a narrative that isn't self-contradictory.  That's mere consistency: there's nothing that is 100% irreconcilable here.  Unfortunately for you, this type of justification, and theories which depend upon it, have a name, and that is 'coherence theory'.  Unfortunately for you, the problems inherent with justification based upon coherenc e alone (consistency) are well known, discussed at length in the literature, and have few if any resolutions that can even pass the smell test.  In short, this nonsense is the type of apologetic tripe and just-so story that in another context, say that of evolution or other scientific discipline, is rejected out-of-hand by the same proponents who are making such arguments for the bible.  Any such people who have done so, and I'm not going to research to determine whether or not Drich has done so, are guilty of a double-standard, which, if employed in support of a conclusion ren ders the combined logic and worldview inconistent and invalid, and as a result, any conclusions based on that worldview or that logic cannot be held to be reliably true.  Such conclusions then become nothing more than ignorant and stupid ass-tooting, or in Drich's case, an example of somebody satisfying their incessant need to stroke their dick in public.

[Image: E1Ti05dd.jpg]

But I see you finally follow.. you FINALLY understand the principle well enough to try and dismiss it on the actual construction and content of the narrative rather than the broad strokes and appeal to stereotypical creation arguments. The video was effective enough for you to avoid content and go for my lack of pedigree, which a is a hallmark of a solid work that shakes the foundation of the establishment.

Ultimately, I respect your contribution or opinion, a you object tell me far more than well wisher or general praiser could. For that I do indeed thank you, but here's where you inda miss the boat yet again. (my gotcha douche bag) if you will.. This is nor was it ever meant to be an absolute nor theological solvent work in that it would coincide with religious or denomination exegetical/hermeneutical work. why? because they all fail to do what you your self identified as my one saving attribute here in this theory/narrative. This work is not self contradictory.

NOT ONE major denomination or non denominational church, religious body or any form of modern christianity has a exegetical hermeneutic that is non self contradictional concerning these first 5 chapters in one form or another concerning the logical holes their narrative leave in the story.

So then why oh why would i align my self with what does not work? Just so I can have the badge of authenticity of being the work of a calvinist? or a catholic? those name pedigrees or titles mean nothing to me. what is important to me is truth logic and consistency. to which this work seems to deliver.

If I am wrong then contextually and topically show me.. but you can't. The best you can do is show me a passage and tell me what another version of christianity thinks it says/means. a version who's total cartization of these 5 book is in fact self contradictory and full of holes. which is what most of you like doing to new christian that come here. is to get them to commit to their beliefs and point out all of the contradictions and holes.

Bottom line. if you have a belief on the origins of the world this message is not for you. however if you are struggling to reconcile scientific theory with your faith and need to maintain a pure reading for both... Then consider this message this narrative as the only fault people seem to bring up is that the author is not a professor at a major religious university. Winking

1 Corinthians 1:27 New International Version (NIV)

27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.

So tell me some more on how stupid you think me to be hobo

[Image: 82369912-challenge-accepted-rubber-stamp.jpg?ver=6]

Apparently your 4th-grade reading comprehension was challenged and completely succumbed to the  problem of recognizing that when I stated that my explanation was not for you, as clearly noted by the words, "NOT YOU," in the text, I meant that I wasn't providing a response directed toward you.  You've surely outdone yourself here.  The infinite nature of your stupidity, cluelessness, and general incompetence surely must qualify as the eighth wonder of the world.

For completeness, you claimed that I had no other objections to your moronic ass twaddle such as the problems in exegesis and hermeneutics which I noted in passing.  Since I did in fact mention those problems, your claim that I have no other problems than the one I expounded upon at length is just another one of your laughably obvious lies and misrepresentations.  And my more extensive exploration of the issues raised was not even remotely as you described it, having nothing whatsoever to do with whether you had a certain pedigree or not.  I neither cared nor was interested in whether you understood the point or not, because, again, those remarks weren't for your benefit, a fact the observation of which apparently required at least a fifth-grade level of reading comprehension which you with your fourth-grade level of reading comprehension do not possess.  And finally, there are legitimate reasons to trust the knowledge, wisdom, and judgement of certain people over others.  You, whether you like it or not, are simply woefully overmatched.

Again.. you argued points which before you where oblivious to in previous version of this. points lost to you in my limited 4th grade gramatical efforts. IE: the video worked. because my points never changed. yet you approach did. Now I can see how/why you would go back to content lacking ad hom attacks, because you can't seem to say anything that doesn't give me the information I am seeking. 

Best for you to Stick to the broad brush, speak in grandiose fashion about general failures. Stay off topic like a plague, otherwise your peers may see how your "overmatch intellect" feigns quickly off ad hom topics.

You are the best at being mean to people... not so good at other things i'm afraid. like simple polite discourse. 

I am sorry for anything I did to make you this spiteful.
Reply
#39

creation/evolution the video
(12-06-2019, 10:20 PM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: The problem with theistic evolution is that you need a theos, a God to make it work.  Some weeks ago, I offered Drich a half dozen reasons why the Biblical God was not a viable idea.  That still stands.

When God shows up, little list offered by strangers do not work anymore.

That is what Christianity is. being able to be sat down before God in this life.
Reply
#40

creation/evolution the video
(12-06-2019, 10:55 PM)Minimalist Wrote:
Quote:this is inpart the reason I have been able to reconcile both a 7 day creation with a bazillion year evolutionary theory.


The bigger part of the reason is that you are batshit crazy.  There are no gods, Drippy.  You are on your own.  Stop wasting your life on bullshit.

seen too much minnie.. Been saved too many times.
Reply
#41

creation/evolution the video
(12-06-2019, 11:02 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 08:00 PM)Drich Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 06:33 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote: The whole of Christianity is based on the old fantasy story/myth of Adam and Eve.  The facts of evolution show there was no Adam and Eve, there was no fall of man and no need for a blood sacrifice. Without the Adam and Eve story you got nothing.  The whole thing is madeup crap.

What facts?

What facts are there on any individuals that far back?

Just because there is not a written fact about two people that far back does it then mean no one existed back then? or rather it is far more plausible you simply have incomplete information and you are trying to make it fit the whole of what it is you want to believe?

Evolution is a fact and DNA confirms it.  Evolution doesn't go back to two individual people.  Evolution progresses through small,  incremental changes throughout vast amounts of time.  Go read an actual book on evolution by an accredited evolutionary biologist and then get back to me.

you didn't watch the video did you?

What makes you think you can just be apart of the discussion.. what if the topic is of one you never heard before? (it kinda is) watch the video and rephrase your statement in light of what I shared.
Reply
#42

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 12:07 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 05:52 PM)Drich Wrote: For the same reason I tell christians who want to hang on to their original faith/reading of gen1.

This message is not for you..

No one here is struggling with anything.
I actually get emails and message from people who are.
Quote:Therefore your bullshit is totally irrelevant here. 
Get lost. 
The Bible is not science.
the bible is not supposed to be science. It is a map to find God.
Quote:The people who assembled/edited it had NO CLUE how anything happened. they made it up. 
There is nothing to reconcile.
if they had no clue then how is it I can not line everything science says with one very little modification/Take the time line out between gen 2 and gen 3, and it all can jive?

Quote:You know nothing about ancient Near Eastern literature, and are incompetent to even speak about it.
You're suffering from Dunning-Krueger syndrome. Dump the religious BS, and get a life.
did you know of the dunning-kruger test? google it.. actual never mind if pride hasn't allowed you to google it thus far then you won't now.
In a nut shell.. if you think you are in a position to identify Dunning-Kruger syndrome then you suffer from it yourself. Otherwise know there are a series of questions that first must be examined. they can be found here:
http://www.dunningkrugertest.com/
Reply
#43

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 06:09 AM)Chas Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 05:52 PM)Drich Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 05:28 PM)Alan V Wrote: The question is, why bother?  Evolution stands just fine on its own.  No God is necessary.

Of course you can always jam God in the gaps if that suits your purposes.  But that doesn't really add anything to our understanding.

For the same reason I tell christians who want to hang on to their original faith/reading of gen1.

This message is not for you..

It is for the one who struggles to want to reconcile their faith with what science has to say. to want to free believe in God and to go alone with whatever the current iteration of the theory states.

Your target audience isn't here.  Haven't you figured that out?
can't save the saved old sport.
Reply
#44

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 06:15 AM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 05:52 PM)Drich Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 05:28 PM)Alan V Wrote: The question is, why bother?  Evolution stands just fine on its own.  No God is necessary.

Of course you can always jam God in the gaps if that suits your purposes.  But that doesn't really add anything to our understanding.

For the same reason I tell christians who want to hang on to their original faith/reading of gen1.

This message is not for you..

It is for the one who struggles to want to reconcile their faith with what science has to say. to want to free believe in God and to go alone with whatever the current iteration of the theory states.

More specifically to broaden one's mind beyond the box or boundaries of a god only or a science only existence.

To push their understanding of God into the modern world to look for him in modern terms (transdimensional being with tech or cosmological power or access to the cosmos we yet to understand.) rather than a grand old merlin type wizard who does party tricks on demand.

I am a firm believer in God and yet I make my living in a scientific/engineering field. Something many christians feel unwelcome in or are even opposed to or are opposed by their peers. being able to reconcile God and a bunch of other supposed contradictions with a very simple and easy to understand process will give people the freedom to choose and thin fr their own rather than polarize themselves as being for us or against us.

How is that a bad thing?

Why would anyone want to push ancient myths into the present?  Do you believe in ancient Greek gods?  Have you no concept of learning?  It seems that you suggest we should all still be living in 1 AD.  Or earlier.
why would you discard anything learned from ancient times just because it was discovered a long time ago?

Or did you reinvent philosophy
geometry, cultivation ranching, heck even baking bread. 

there is not one day that goes by that your life is not touched by what we learned from that time period or earlier. why discard it for the whole of society just because you have no need for a bread recipe.
Reply
#45

creation/evolution the video
(12-09-2019, 08:41 PM)Drich Wrote: I actually get emails and message from people who are.

You're a liar. That's what you claim elsewhere. It's a total fabrication. 
Lying for Jesus is still lying. 
No one in their right mind would come to a non-believer site and propose this crap. 
No one here has been, or is, working with you on anything, much less this giant piece of crap. 

Quote:The bible is not supposed to be science. It is a map to find God.

Actually it isn't, and you can quote NOT ONE recognized Biblical Scholar that says that. 
You have no education in the field. None. It shows with every post you write.
BTW, scholars are very familiar with the two versions of the creation MYTH, and how and why they both got incorporated into Genesis.
Since you have NO education in the subject, you have no clue. Every FIRST year student in the field knows about this.
https://www.bibleodyssey.org/en/passages...in-genesis
https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/Genesis_texts.html
Reply
#46

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 10:07 AM)SYZ Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 03:55 PM)Drich Wrote: I've been working on this idea or concept with you guys and others for a while and I have since made a little video/outline of the basic premise...

I can appreciate the time you've taken to produce your video, but posting it on an atheist web site
is ultimately a total waste of your time.  It'll obviously draw a lot of flak, as it has thus far, so unless
you're a mental masochist, I can't see what's motivated you to make this effort.  Of course first up
it'll be considered as proselytising—which is a dirty word to non-believers.

I note you've titled your video "How to reconcile all of evolution into a literal 7 day creation without
changing a word of either".  Well, to start with, the evolutionary process—as has already been evidenced—
has no need for "change" in the sense that you're implying.  It stands as it is, and the only changes,
as such, will be more updated data as and when it comes to light.

Your video makes the common mistake of many theists—which is trying to shoehorn biblical scripture
into the scientific record to give it the appearance of equivalence and/or conformity with 21st century
thinking.  Which can never happen.  And even you have to admit that the 7-day creation thing is nothing
more than a fairy tale cobbled together by people who had a zero working understanding of the sciences.

I think it's actually offensive when theists try this con job, as
though every atheist is as dumb as a sack full of hammers.

If and when God is apparent to everyone (the day is coming) and he can no longer be denied, what do you think Science say? how do you think 'science will identify God? will they say oops we are wrong that is the God of the bible!

Even if God came and opened a porthole to the pat and we could literally all watch it all play out as described in the bible. Science would still not bend the figurative knee.

God will be identified by science as a transdimensional being with either tech that is beyond our comprehension or bio mental connection to some greater 'force' we do not understand yet. in that regard alone you are correct as science and God will never get together.

However for the more open minded science is nothing more than how a natural God put his creation in order and maintains it.
Reply
#47

creation/evolution the video
(12-07-2019, 10:59 AM)Cavebear Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 08:03 PM)Drich Wrote:
(12-06-2019, 07:39 PM)Alan V Wrote: I completely understand your impulse here, and spent decades of my own life on exactly the same problem of trying to reconcile a God-concept with modern scientific discoveries.  (I could write a whole essay on that subject alone, though you might not care for it since I was working from a Sufi/Islamic God-concept rather than the Christian one.)

In fact, I encourage you to try to do so because it will likely help you clarify your own thinking.  I just couldn't help you with your own project since the very idea of it seems exhausting to me.

Sun
I have been doing this very thing over the last 20 year using your (atheist) questions and objections resulting in 10's of thousands if not 100s of thousands of pages of dialog on this very subject. this is inpart the reason I have been able to reconcile both a 7 day creation with a bazillion year evolutionary theory.

They aren't "atheist" questions.  They are mere matters of science.  If you want to think of your 7 days as 13+ billion years, that is up to you.  But those sure make some long days...

Actually, if you want a more poetic version of "creation", read the beginning of the 'Silmarillion' by Tolkien.  Equally fictional, but MUCH better written.

didn't watch the video huh... but think you got what it takes to be apart of the discussion because you heard it all and know it all. what if this is completely different??? wouldn't matter much because your mind is already made up! 

Need to close you mind a little tighter make sure you don't watch something you might not have the answer to!
Reply
#48

creation/evolution the video
Quote:the day is coming

Yawn.
You people have been claiming that for thousands of years.
Reply
#49

creation/evolution the video
(12-09-2019, 08:48 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:
(12-09-2019, 08:41 PM)Drich Wrote: I actually get emails and message from people who are.

You're a liar. That's what you claim elsewhere. It's a total fabrication. 
Lying for Jesus is still lying. 
No one in their right mind would come to a non-believer site and propose this crap. 

Quote:The bible is not supposed to be science. It is a map to find God.

Actually it isn't, and you can quote NOT ONE recognized Biblical Scholar that says that. 
You have no education in the field. None. It shows with every post you write.
BTW, scholars are very familiar with the two versions of the creation MYTH, and how and why they both got incorporated into Genesis.
Since you have NO education in the subject, you have no clue. Every FIRST year student in the field knows about this.
https://www.bibleodyssey.org/en/passages...in-genesis
https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/Genesis_texts.html

no one from this website has contacted me. however I have had several pen pal as it were one almost lasted 8 years, before he switched over to christianity.

and all you have to do is search the other AF on this subject and several (regulars) people were inadvertently outed this year.

What is it that makes you so mad that not all of you always pretend to think he knows how the whole universe works all the time?

What makes you think that nothing supernatural has ever happened to any of you outside the church and want answers or direction?

Why are you so put off of the idea that most of you have doubts?

I even have an atheist fan. apparently he does not post much but likes how I can shellac 15 or 20 of you at a time with what most of you think is a made up fantasy.

Or is it that it makes it harder for you to pretend I am just some tard who like waist tons of time reading and posting.
Reply
#50

creation/evolution the video
(12-09-2019, 09:02 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:
Quote:the day is coming

Yawn.
You people have been claiming that for thousands of years.

and that day comes for each and everyne of those people who lived in those thousands of years
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)