Daniel cain 48,347 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 9 hours ago, shaaark said: God, jesus, the miracles, etc etc etc, you really think they're real?! You and whoever thinks that, ok, crack on, I CHOOSE NOT to believe in any of it. Really is that simple. You put up a list of supposed miracles that Jesus did when he was alive....they are well documented over hundreds/thousand yrs ,not just by the Christian faith...how scary would it be if there was 1 man going around performing miracles and folks stop going to the temple etc,and started questioning everything? Would it not upset the Applecart and powers that be? Surely you would want that person stopped/killed,so the others fall back in line,you would do your best to rubbish that person and erode their memory??? Well that's what happened to Jesus Shaaark If it was bollocks,then why the f**k is every other religion still trying to attack God/Jesus all these years later??? It's travelled some distance and kept going if it was all lies and made up 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NEWKID 28,420 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 7 minutes ago, Daniel cain said: You put up a list of supposed miracles that Jesus did when he was alive....they are well documented over hundreds/thousand yrs ,not just by the Christian faith...how scary would it be if there was 1 man going around performing miracles and folks stop going to the temple etc,and started questioning everything? Would it not upset the Applecart and powers that be? Surely you would want that person stopped/killed,so the others fall back in line,you would do your best to rubbish that person and erode their memory??? Well that's what happened to Jesus Shaaark If it was bollocks,then why the f**k is every other religion still trying to attack God/Jesus all these years later??? It's travelled some distance and kept going if it was all lies and made up I feel the same about Dynamo...blokes a freak lol.. I think in the modern scientific world it's easy to disprove many of the teachings of Christianity and religion in general, if that's your agenda.. but... religion is faith driven, it is a belief that only the person who has faith can feel/explain, it's not for us non believers to attempt to disprove someone faith, that is their personal feelings...arguing creation/evolution is one thing and makes for interesting reading but calling out a man on his faith is another imo... there is nothing to gain or prove Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pardus 1,610 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 5 minutes ago, NEWKID said: I feel the same about Dynamo...blokes a freak lol.. I think in the modern scientific world it's easy to disprove many of the teachings of Christianity and religion in general, if that's your agenda.. but... religion is faith driven, it is a belief that only the person who has faith can feel/explain, it's not for us non believers to attempt to disprove someone faith, that is their personal feelings...arguing creation/evolution is one thing and makes for interesting reading but calling out a man on his faith is another imo... there is nothing to gain or prove It's not about mocking someone for their beliefs, it's about upholding the idea of truth. Faith might be important to some people but it shouldn't be immune to criticism either. We challenge each other's ideas in every other area of life, i don't know why faith should be any different? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lenmcharristar 10,247 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 21 minutes ago, Daniel cain said: You put up a list of supposed miracles that Jesus did when he was alive....they are well documented over hundreds/thousand yrs ,not just by the Christian faith...how scary would it be if there was 1 man going around performing miracles and folks stop going to the temple etc,and started questioning everything? Would it not upset the Applecart and powers that be? Surely you would want that person stopped/killed,so the others fall back in line,you would do your best to rubbish that person and erode their memory??? Well that's what happened to Jesus Shaaark If it was bollocks,then why the f**k is every other religion still trying to attack God/Jesus all these years later??? It's travelled some distance and kept going if it was all lies and made up Theyy have eyes yet do not see 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pardus 1,610 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 1 minute ago, Lenmcharristar said: Theyy have eyes yet do not see Ray Charles & Stevie Wonder? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NEWKID 28,420 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 13 minutes ago, Pardus said: It's not about mocking someone for their beliefs, it's about upholding the idea of truth. Faith might be important to some people but it shouldn't be immune to criticism either. We challenge each other's ideas in every other area of life, i don't know why faith should be any different? No "truth" can be proven in faith mate, you know that, it is a belief which is personal... its arguing for the sake of arguing imo.. but Francie has the patience to engage in the discussion so no worries 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pardus 1,610 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 1 minute ago, NEWKID said: No "truth" can be proven in faith mate, you know that, it is a belief which is personal... its arguing for the sake of arguing imo.. but Francie has the patience to engage in the discussion so no worries If we want to be honest, no good evidence can either. Francie enjoys it, he does exactly the same against science. I personally can't understand why anyone could trust in faith more so than science but each to their own I suppose. Lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shaaark 11,342 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 20 minutes ago, Lenmcharristar said: Theyy have eyes yet do not see No, that's just mCHULL. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,759 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 2 hours ago, Pardus said: If we want to be honest, no good evidence can either. Francie enjoys it, he does exactly the same against science. I personally can't understand why anyone could trust in faith more so than science but each to their own I suppose. Lol What does science mean exactly pardus. It means TESTABLE AN OBSERVABLE I really enjoy science,I'm not against it,but your trying to say evoloution is science,when it's not,it's not testable or observable,therefore you need faith to beleive it. Science in my opinion proves a creator,for example I look at dogs an see a good variation within the canine kind,from Patterdale to boxer to doberman to greyhound to kangal,scientists call it evoloution, but iits not darwinian evoloution which states that given enough time were a canine will "evolve" to a feline kind,that's were it jumps from science to faith because that kind of change has never ever been seen,an wil never be seen because it can't happen. Same with birds,there's alot of variation within the bird kind,an we can see that everyday,a bird will produce a bird,no ifs or buts,that's science testable an observable,to say if you give birds enough time they will change into a different kind is not science an has never bee seen. I can accept I have faith but evoloutiin needs just as much faith imo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,759 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 Another dead end in darwinian evoloution is fossils,were are all these fossils of these evolved creatures,from a single celled organism right up to all the animals we see today,they would have to be billions of intermediate creatures,literally billions of fossils should be found but there ain't,there absolutely 0,why is that do we think? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pardus 1,610 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Francie, said: What does science mean exactly pardus. It means TESTABLE AN OBSERVABLE I really enjoy science,I'm not against it,but your trying to say evoloution is science,when it's not,it's not testable or observable,therefore you need faith to beleive it. Science in my opinion proves a creator,for example I look at dogs an see a good variation within the canine kind,from Patterdale to boxer to doberman to greyhound to kangal,scientists call it evoloution, but iits not darwinian evoloution which states that given enough time were a canine will "evolve" to a feline kind,that's were it jumps from science to faith because that kind of change has never ever been seen,an wil never be seen because it can't happen. Same with birds,there's alot of variation within the bird kind,an we can see that everyday,a bird will produce a bird,no ifs or buts,that's science testable an observable,to say if you give birds enough time they will change into a different kind is not science an has never bee seen. I can accept I have faith but evoloutiin needs just as much faith imo You are wrong right from the start, evolution HAS been observed and tested repeatedly. It's been observed in bacteria, in insects, animals, adapting to environmental pressures. It's been tested genetically, what do you think DNA testing is? How do you think they know things like us sharing a common ancestor with chimps? We've got transitional fossils that show gradual changes. Your dog in to a cat argument is just a silly strawman, the theory of evolution doesn't say that at all. Evolution is not about one animal suddenly turning in to another, it's about common descent with modification. You accept small changes, but millions of years of small changes will eventually amount to bigger changes from the common ancestor, that's exactly what the genetics and fossil records show. Evolution doesn't require faith, it requires evidence, unlike the meaning of the Bible. Edited June 14 by Pardus Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,759 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 19 minutes ago, Pardus said: You are wrong right from the start, evolution HAS been observed and tested repeatedly. It's been observed in bacteria, in insects, animals, adapting to environmental pressures. It's been tested genetically, what do you think DNA testing is? How do you think they know things like us sharing a common ancestor with chimps? We've got transitional fossils that show gradual changes. Your dog in to a cat argument is just a silly strawman, the theory of evolution doesn't say that at all. Evolution is not about one animal suddenly turning in to another, it's about common descent with modification. You accept small changes, but millions of years of small changes will eventually amount to bigger changes from the common ancestor, that's exactly what the genetics and fossil records show. Evolution doesn't require faith, it requires evidence, unlike the meaning of the Bible. Lol your wrong mate,show me were it has been tested an observed repeatably Let's see it.pick one an well go through it. All the transitional animals,there's about two or three,there should be billions,were are they all mate The transitional fossils that evolutionists use are all up for debate,it's definitely not set in stone,an the debate continues. You say it's not about canine to feline bit it is exactly about that,because the further you go back there would have to be a cross over over somewhere to get the distinction between feline an canine. Your only going back as far as common ancestor,what was before the common ancestor to the supposed primates we evolved from. What did the common ancestor evolve from,because evoloution states we started from a single cell organism? What was after the single cell organism?what did it evolve into,an so forth,there's nothing about that at all,you have no answers only a common ancestor,what was before that? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,759 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 You don't want to go far back in the supposed evolutionary chain because it shows the absurdity of the theory. But just to amuse you,we'll skip how physical matter came into being then magically came alive(good trick) from non living material to a single celled organism. Well skip all that,so from a single celled organism it evolved into multicellular organisms then on to sea sponges,so every living thing on earth including animals an humans according to evoloution evolved from sea sponges lol Does that sound plausible to you,sea sponges have,no nervous system,no stomachs hearts or a brain etc How did they evolve all these things. How did brains come about,nervous systems etc there's no proof whatsoever that this is possible. So from sea sponges what did they evolve into next?no one has a clue It's just complete bollocks mate an 100percent not scientific 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,759 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 Every complex organ in our body would have to evolve from a single celled organism,what even is the mechanism for this an how could it of happened the complexity of our brain an it supposedly evolved from a single cell,our eye our heart,kidneys lungs they would all have to evolve out of thin air oh I forgot blood to aswell lol Biggest load of bollocks. The further you go back in the supposed evolutionary scale the more it unravels an shows that its a dead end. This is the part of evoloution that needs faith because,it hasn't been seen or tested an can't be proved. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shaaark 11,342 Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 You tell him, Francie!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.