|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why we should not expect many if any Creationists | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
[ Content hidden. --Admin ]
And you have derailed yet another thread. I guess I can't blame you. You never suffer any consequences for derailing threads. You are just like a spoiled child that never suffers any consequences for their actions. Go ahead shit all over another thread. It is what you do best. Edited by Admin, : Hide content.Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.6
|
quote: it isn't really interesting, just giving you the benefit of the doubt. You see you didn't make that distinction - and if you did the question arises of who gets to decide which belief systems are true ? You would be reduced to special pleading or evading the question pretty quickly because yet the belief you don't want contradicted is pretty clearly false to most of us here. One day you really ought to try and grasp one basic fact about principles - if you really believe in a principle you don't apply it only when it is convenient for you. That's why the ACLU will defend the rights of people that they disagree with - it's a stand on principle. And that is something that deserves more respect than a mere belief.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
YOu are right, I didn't make that distinction and didn't think I could make it in a way anyone would accept anyway. I recognized the principle of course, silly to think otherwise. But that's okay, I reviewed Admin's post and see we're off topic.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aussie Member Posts: 275 From: FL USA Joined: |
All that should be evidence that Catholicism is not based on the Bible and therefore not Christian. I actually agree with your previous post. These are their sincerely held beliefs. This is disrespectful. "...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yes I guess you can disrespect my beliefs too then because I'm not going to call the RCC Christian when its "sincerely held beliefs" are predominantly pagan. Being respectful, however, shouldn't require a person to lie and call a pagan belief system Christian. I just feel sorry for Catholics and the reason I constantly bring up this subject is in the hope that some who are trusting in that false religion might wake up and be saved.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9517 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
Faith writes: Yes I guess you can disrespect my beliefs too Just for the record, disrespecting views/opinions/beliefs is not the same as disrespecting the holder of those beliefs. If it was no one would be able to challenge anything. It's a common method of attempting to shut down a debate - but it's not going to work in this place.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aussie Member Posts: 275 From: FL USA Joined:
|
Yes I guess you can disrespect my beliefs too then because I'm not going to call the RCC Christian when its "sincerely held beliefs" are predominantly pagan. Stop confusing disrespect with disbelief. You all (believers of every religion) cling to your "Faith" to believe what you do because there is no other reason to believe. I have Christian friends whom I love and hold the deepest respect for, yet disbelieve their religious views. I've told you in the past of my many Hindu and Muslim students. All of you...every last one of you...has faith that what they believe is the Universal Reality. I have a reasonably high index of confidence that all my friends' "Sincerely held religious beliefs," including yours, are predominantly imaginary. Edited by Aussie, : Spelling..."...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPhat Inactive Member |
This thread is wandering off topic. The original topic is as follows:
quote: Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given. Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
Percy
Putting aside your and the others arrogance There are very specific reasons other than you have won, why creationist do not continue It is equally true that you fellas generally do not follow where evidence leads Arguments reach a logical empass and it has nothing to do with you winning the argument As I've stated to many times to mention with no fear of contradiction Creation and design are not religious or biblical issues anymore than how the universe began, is a biologicalmy based evolution issue Origins, creation or so called natural causes fall to logical arguments based on logical allowances and reality Since design or creation are one of only two possibiltes and design is very much a part of that possibility it can and is a very real scientifically established proposition Here the argument ends and support begins Specific revelation only supports that naturally scientifically established proposition However Once we see that you are not actually following the evidence where it leads the conversation really ends The rest is just commentary You can't win something you can't answer yes even your arrogant pompous individuals This however has nothing to with the misconception that design and creation are not science Your so-called Scientific Method ignores the basics of reason and actual science I'll be happy to restate these If need be If you don't like the Biblical explanation of creation simply remember you and I were not there and trying to find how it happened will not work by looking at present factors. It will only move you backwards to a place where it still has no answer But remember neither proposition is based INITIALLY on your so-called SM or even the Biblical account but it is based on what reality based logic will allow This is why the Bible even claims the same in Romans 1:20 While there may be a certain iorny in quoting the Bible, it's actually telling you what I am elaborately stating, it, the Bible is telling you how science, at least respecting origins actually works Science it up if you want but at least proceed in a logical fashion Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
A science that is logically and realty based has nothing to do with myth or stories
The fact of a designed and created universe is primarily reason based, on reality based reasons, set out in logical propositions If any person thinks I'm incorrect please by all means let them step up an demonstrate otherwise No one is afraid to debate it and you certain haven't won anything You can simply demonstrate otherwise or you can't I simply got tired of waiting for an actual debate Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
Now watch how I proceed anticipating anticipating your next objection
Youll say It's not that we , the SM disallow creation but that it's simply not science based Ah but as I have demonstrated it is more scientifically based than any proposition , principle or observation Then you say we cant allow it in school because it's not science based But as I have demonstrated to many times to mention it can only be science based, there is no other way to perceive it When I am offered no argument to the contrary is there a reason to continue, really Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
Only the simplest of minds would assume that disagreeing or disreguarding the Biblical account of creation, is somehow tantamount to disproving creationism, young or old earth
The same would be true of a person that disreguarded the totality of the general and overwhelimg evidence that supports the Bibles veracityNot having all or some of the creation account in the Bible, which may not have been provided is not the same as demonstrating it as false, inaccurate or not to be believed But to reiterate, that is a separate issue as To wheather creation is scientific or evidential The usual tactic of the evolutionist or skeptic is to get the creationist or design exponent tied up in some specific biological detail, unwaringly causing them to ignore any of the basics of the actual arguments I am certain this explains the Whys of the fact that creationist do not remainYou have assumed you have won something you haven't even started But if you think I'm wrong let that person step up Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
Good advise Paulk about holding principles only when it is convenient.
Much like the principle of the scientific Method, holding only, when it is convinent to exclude actual evidence as to what constitutes science Which further helps it and is convenient to exclude creation as science and how the creation principle is established Well thank you Paulk for that sound advice Are you following your own advice? Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
And BTW The thread title is inaccurate and nearly nonsensical
The term Creation does not refer to a group of people that believe it, it is a principle like that of gravity or design It's a science ,based on reality and logic, not a group of people. We simply discovered it we didn't invent it. We could not discover it if it we're not science based. Dawn Bertot . Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Learn to read Dawn, I used the term Creationists not Creation.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024