No, I have destroyed every creationist arguement ever proposed on this website. It is not a fact, nor does it have evidence. No there isn't. Name one. Bullshit. You are ignorant of the counter-claims against your own and even of your own religion, therefore I deem thee ignorant. --- Extra if you even understood half of what was said in that article you would know it only serves to disprove your claims. Bodies don't take 200 years to decay so when one is found that is intact past a certain mark it is remarkable. This dinosaur had an incredibly fortuitous event happen to it, unfortunately BILLIONS of other dinosaurs didn't, so why is this one special? If there was a flood we should find more of these mummies according to you. But we don't. Your stupid flood is a myth, learn a thing or two.
Actually, all you've done with my arguments is say "No" is "That's a falsehood" Daniel prophesied that Jesus would claim to be king of the Jews down the exact day. (I forget the number of days, being my lazy self, so go look it up). On that day, Jesus rode on the donkey being praised by the people. Erm... give me evidence to support other religions? Your ignorant answers have nothing to back themselves up, "therefore I deem thee ignorant."
Your only sense of evidence, or backing is the christian bible, which in itself is a book of fairy tales. To believe in a divine and supernatural prophet/messiah because of a book, is the same as believing that Snow White and the seven dwarves existed in a form other than ink inscribed on the pages of a book.. Using your logic, I now pronounce "The Catcher in the Rye" as a real sequence of events, and pledge my undying submission and worship to Holden. Hehe.
No I didn't. I actually have refuted all the claims and you can easily view that by clicking "view all posts." I don't know what else you'd want. The other two weren't up to me, the second was up to you, and the third was up to a person of some other religion, not me. So your telling me that there was a prediction in a book that comes true in that same book in a later chapter...AMAZING! You've discovered foreshadowing, I'm so proud of you. I've got a prediction for you, you'll reply to my post. If you don't you're a coward.
FR0ZEN FEAR, back out while you still can. There's no point in coming here repeating what's said in your Bible Class. Wait till you're a little bit older, a little but wiser and able to convey what you mean to say more concisely.
Science class acaully. And most of you are just saying no and assuming Im stupid. If you wanna believe in nothing thats your choice. EDIT: You know the athiests are the stubborn ones, we just want you to see our point of view and your only defense against creation is, Science is fact with no real evidence, just the theorys. Give me a 100% detailed description of why evolution is true.
I have a better prediction Nitrous. Well, I say we all end the debate here, since Nostradamus and the Mayans predicted the world will end in 2012 (Gosh, I have 2 sources to back up this point. Awesome!). Why debate when we could be enjoying life to the fullest for these last few years? ... Or do you not believe all prophesies?
Don't bother acaully writing an essay. I know what its gunna be like... its fact! its fact! I give up...
Is your science teacher a christian or an atheist? Do you go to a public or private school? Do your parents emphasize certain aspects of your education over others? You can't just accept what others say simply because they are in a position of authority over you. You need to take a step back and honestly weigh things out in your mind, look for evidence that supports both and evidence to the contrary. Ask your pastor, your teachers, and your parents. If you're going to have an active faith then you need to be well grounded. It's easy to come to a forum where you think you've got all the right answers. It can be frustrating when people mock your faith, but you're going to have to be rational about things and understand that the Bible is a book of Faith, it can't be held up as a science manual. So, again research actual facts. It helps to be specualtive about everything; pastors and scientist. Everyone has an agenda they're promoting.
Christ almighty, how do some folks know so much about the great plan of God and Jesus? Where was I when this revelation occurred? (Hmm, not trying to be harsh, but I dislike "predictions" because so many have been brought up before. They can't be used as fact, and they usually don't add to the debate.) Nitrous already discussed this. It's only one dinosaur; if you think the flood made that possible, why aren't there more of those types of fossils? Didn't the flood cover the whole world? Too many assume that the opposition here is trying to kill them. In actuality, we are just debating points as you are. Your only defense against science is the bible. Don't bother bringing science to back yourself up, since you just said our use of science against you is ineffective.
Well, thanks for respecting my belief although its still unchanged. But think about that a little, do you go to public school? Do your parents believe in religeon? Creation is a faith, evolution is also a faith. Okay Im done...
this has probably been stated before but here goes. Proof of God's, a god, or multiple god's existence is pretty much nonexistent. All people have are their faiths, and how they percieve the world is how they see evidence of their god, or other religious figures like a demon, angel, or satan-like figure. Those who choose to see proof will see proof in their life around them. Those that choose to not see, or choose to be completely neutral toward any kind of a belief will not see, for the most part, any existance of God in their lives. The only way to prove God is if there were clearly documented evidence; and even then (just like other religious texts) it may be debated just as hotly as it is today, as further generations down the road begin to question the truth of that information, just like we question the bible and other religious texts today.So, proof of God is simply how strong you are in your faith. If you have a lot of it, you have all the proof you need of god. If you are lacking, then you have little to no proof at all. (sorry if my thought process is hard to understand lol)
I believe in life. I question it, as nearly everyone else does, but in a sense I know that the answers will most likely never come.. if anything, not in my time. I have faith in myself and what I make out my life to be. It's not that I'm selfish, never. It's that I believe in something I'll probably never be able to explain to anyone. If anyone else shares my beliefs, and can understand me, I'm glad to know I'm not alone. Even if I was alone, I wouldn't feel foolish, because not being like everyone gives a sense of being unique, and being unique feels amazing. Words cannot explain this fully. I've tried. =)
A few pages back someone said that the Bible is false, they said that it can't be proven. Here is a few facts that can prove that the bible dates back before Christ. If your looking for more facts here is the link Reasons to Trust the Bible - Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site People: Bible critics questioned the existence of Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea who handed Jesus over to be impaled. (Matthew 27:1-26) Evidence that Pilate was once ruler of Judea is etched on a stone discovered at the Mediterranean seaport city of Caesarea in 1961. Before 1993, there was no proof outside the Bible to support the historicity of David, the brave young shepherd who later became king of Israel. That year, however, archaeologists uncovered in northern Israel a basalt stone, dated to the ninth century B.C.E., that experts say bears the words “House of David” and “king of Israel.” Events: Until recently, many scholars doubted the accuracy of the Bible’s account of the nation of Edom battling with Israel in the time of David. (2 Samuel 8:13, 14) Edom, they argued, was a simple pastoral society at the time and did not become sufficiently organized or have the might to threaten Israel until much later. However, recent excavations indicate that “Edom was a complex society centuries earlier [than previously thought], as reflected in the Bible,” states an article in the journal Biblical Archaeology Review. Proper titles: There were many rulers on the world stage during the 16 centuries that the Bible was being written. When the Bible refers to a ruler, it always uses the proper title. For example, it correctly refers to Herod Antipas as “district ruler” and Gallio as “proconsul.” (Luke 3:1; Acts 18:12) Ezra 5:6 refers to Tattenai, the governor of the Persian province “beyond the River,” the Euphrates River. A coin produced in the fourth century B.C.E. contains a similar description, identifying the Persian governor Mazaeus as ruler of the province “Beyond the River.” Accuracy in seemingly minor details is no small matter. If we can trust the Bible writers in even small details, should that not bolster our confidence in the other things they wrote? This is very true, I was born Religious, I had a break in the middle where I believed in plenty of other things. I considered Evolution, but Evolution isn't for the people that have faith. It didn't have enough guidance, not enough answers to prove the start of human life. The evolutionists believe that molecules that happened to be there made a big bang effect and started this world. But why can't God be in the place of the molecules, the easiest way to illustrate this is, think of God as the molecules, God wanted there to be human life, so he said bang this created the heavens, bang that created the earth and so on. It's the same concept except one is God and the other are Molecules. I've given Evolution a go, I've given Atheism a go. Some of you haven't even given another belief or acceptance a go.
One of the most common misconceptions of science is that it's just a theory. As if calling something a theory somehow invalidates the truth claims of it, however, the sad part of the story is that most people who claim science is only a theory have no understanding of science and have made no attempt to understand science otherwise they would not have made such an elementary mistake. Science isn't a conclusion it is an investigation of natural phenomena and in that way differentiates itself from religion. It also distinguishes itself by the forcible removing of bias from any and all scientific discoveries so that no matter what our preconceived notions may be they can always be overturned. Another misconception of science is that it has no real evidence, it takes faith to believe. In this particular instance, however, the creationist in question seems to have disproved his own criticism due to his sheer lack of understanding of what evidence is. Facts mean nothing alone. It is the conglomeration of facts that creates evidence. Apples fall, birds fly. They seem to contradict themselves but upon closer inspection these two facts can lead to evidence and the understanding of the principles behind why an apple falls and a bird flies. The bird flies not by magic but by using the same force that pulls the apple to the ground to create lift from the held tight air. You now see why when a creationist allows the scientific community to have facts it must by default allow the scientific community to have evidence. Unfortunately it would take me years, perhaps decades to compile a 100% detailed explanation of evolution and even then it would not be 100%, it would only be 100% of what we know, not 100% of what is to be known. I can, however, do my best to explain it in simple terms. Physical characteristics are passed on through breeding (which is why you look like your dad and mom). Over the centuries humanity has artificially selected animals to breed so that we may reproduce more favorable characteristics. For instance, we always breed winning race horses to produce off spring that will win races. This is done by selecting those who show these characteristics most strongly and breeding them through successive generations. Eventually you create an animal that can not breed with the original population due to genetic differences. This is, in fact, evolution. The selecting is process is different from natural evolution but the result is still evolution. Whether nature is selecting (natural selection) or man (artificial selection) the allelic frequencies of a given population change over time which is the EXACT definition of evolution; genetic variation over time in a given population. Whether you believe a wolf can evolve into a Chihuahua is irrelevant, if you believe genes are passed from one generation to another and can be selected for or against, you accept evolution. The evidence for which is overwhelming. Excluding your less than stellar evidence of the bible's "awesomeness" level I'd like to discuss the points you made. Evolution isn't for people who have faith, you say, then who's it for, those who accept reality? We may not like where science takes us but we can't prevent it from taking us there. And though evolution may not tell us how to be a good person or how to impress our mum on V-day, it does tell us who we are and how we got here. I'd also like to point out that about three years ago (when I was still a Christian) I believed in evolution but not the big bang, so the term evolutionist does not apply to believing in the big bang, it most accurately describes those who accept evolution, though I tend abhor the term. The rest of your arguments were bastardizations of science and a rebuttal to your own straw man arguement. Many people look at the whole atheist, theist arguement from a flawed perspective in assuming that both sides believe either there is a god or there isn't a god. At some instinctual level we all realize that we don't know. So there's no difference there. I instead prefer to rationalize it as do you believe in a god (i don't care whether it's knowable or unknowable). In which case theists and atheists are separated respectively. In this sense we are using, however, many agnostics automatically become atheists because believing is a verb; it is active. And if you are agnostic what god would you be possibly believing in (Jesus, Muhammad, FSM)? In which case I ask, are you even agnostic? The question appears to get much simpler to me and becomes the only question. If god (however you define it) told you (through revelation or scripture or your own communicative means) to kill your child, would you do it? If your answer is no, then in my mind you're an atheist. If you answer yes then you're dangerous and you need to stay away from me.
One of the most misconceptions of God is that he is a fairy tale. We cannot see God because he does not have a human form. Yet, God wants us to get to know him. One way we can become acquainted with him is by observing his extraordinary works—the "paintings" and "sculptures" of creation. At Romans 1:20, the Bible states: "[God's] invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world's creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship." Yes, just as studying a painting or a sculpture can help you gain insight into the personality of the artist, meditating on God's marvelous works can help you become better acquainted with his personality. Of course, we cannot answer all of life's nagging questions merely by looking at God's creative works. But we can find answers to such questions by searching God's Word, the Bible. It was by reading the Bible with an open mind that the two men mentioned earlier came to the conclusion that God exists and that he cares about what happens to us. First of all it doesn't say such nonsense in the Bible. If a Scientist proved that some humans are going to evolve into superheros would you believe that? So how did this whole world thing just happen to happen? If it wasn't the big bang what was it? My arguments were bastardizations of science? When I had this exact same argument with you last year, majority of your arguments were extremely offending. A few pages back you said (in a very hurtful way) to someone, "Your stupid flood is a myth, learn a thing or two". So you can say things that put my religion and other religions down the toilet? Why can't I say things to help defend my beliefs. What I'm trying to say is, this isn't a debate. Debates are mildly friendly, and at least courteous to the opposition. However this has just turned(well it has always been) a flame war.