50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

neal · 03-13-09 4:17 pm

Just pointing out one quote that is kind of weird that Neal probably missed?? Bob The level of your foolishness is amazing. You haven't even read the Bible yet have switched churches and write thousands of posts on forums as if you know something. I have read the whole Gospel. Like John so very eloquently said ITS A FARCE. Ya know, its made up stuff like in your book-you-haven't-read. The guy that wrote the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote it for a reason. The reason was to show how ridiculous beliefs should not be required teaching in science classes. Bobby Henderson is far more educated than your goat herders. He shows correlations between the demise of Pirates and global warming. I know that correlation does not prove causality but I am not certain that you know that.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 4:32 pm

To propose to a kid that maybe gravity is as a result of something or somebody that enjoys touching you, is totally weird, when kids are cautioned about good and bad touching in school. You can call it a joke/farce, but in school this is not joked about, by intelligent people or dumbies, PERIOD. That's MY point.

john8verse32 · 03-13-09 4:33 pm

Thank God for the Flood! marvelous!!!!! the omniscient divinity the Hebrews tell us to worship could not have figured a better way than killing everybody to save everybody? worse: the story claims that He was "sorry He had made them"!!!! not that He was going to save them. even worse, the tale starts with extra terrestrial illegal aliens coming down and impregnating earth women!!!! Genesis 6:1 CEV More and more people were born, until finally they spread all over the earth. Some of their daughters were so beautiful that supernatural beings came down and married the ones they wanted. and this is how the giants of old, which are not found in fossil form anywhere, came about? 4 The children of the supernatural beings who had married these women became famous heroes and warriors. They were called Nephilim and lived on the earth at that time and even later. any ideas why we have no outside verification much less any evidence that this happened? but apparently God didn't like the beautiful women fooling around with illegal space aliens, and He got very angry: 5 The LORD saw how bad the people on earth were and that everything they thought and planned was evil. 6 He was very sorry that he had made them, 7 and he said, "I'll destroy every living creature on earth! I'll wipe out people, animals, birds, and reptiles. I'm sorry I ever made them." question: where in that passage (or anywhere else, for that matter) does Gill find proof that God loves us, and wants to save us, and that's why He had to kill everybody to save everybody? that passage says nothing about a loving God trying to save anybody (except noah et ux)... he deliberately sets out to kill everybody!!! even innocent animals!!!! 6 He was very sorry that he had made them, 7 and he said, "I'll destroy every living creature on earth! I'll wipe out people, animals, birds, and reptiles. I'm sorry I ever made them." why kill birds as part of the "plan of salvation"????? and was it AFTER the flood, after NOAH had saved some snakes, that God allowed the devil to make some of them poisonous? and convert them from eating grass to being the killers they are? apparently God knew how bad things were:... 12 God knew that everyone was terribly cruel and violent. 13 So he told Noah: Cruelty and violence have spread everywhere. Now I'm going to destroy the whole earth and all its people. ..... 17 I'm going to send a flood that will destroy everything that breathes! Nothing will be left alive. and somehow that forms part of the plan of salvation according to Gill? isn't it easier to recussitate the concept of a loving God of the New Test by reinterpreting the Old Test as the ethno-centric, jingoistic, auto-biography of the hebrews and their superstitious attempts to explain their vaunted place in earth history, and provide cover for the killing of their neighbors to take the land they claimed their divinity gave them? OT = hate, violence, murder, mayhem, massacres, often in honor of, and too often at the command of their God....along with sneaky snakes, talking donkeys, all presumably speaking hebrew... NT = love, joy, peace, forgiveness, respect for life and others....and the tragedy that in this life goodness is not always immediately rewarded; does Gill say we need the OT to justify understanding the New? isn't it so much easier (and more philosophically logical) to separate the two once one understands the difference?

neal · 03-13-09 4:34 pm

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:Thank God for the Flood<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> Bob He's probably also happy about the Holocaust. Except the Holocaust actually happened (contrary to the belief of some catholic bishops) but the flood of Genesis never happened. This quote is from a supposed archeological publication. I googled the author and the only things that come up in reference to him are the two trash pieces he wrote for the group that is going to be hosting Ken Ham! Just the mention of Ken Ham discredits the whole organization.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 4:45 pm

Where was Ken Ham mentioned, the guy you are so biased against, in anything above. Admit that your Spegetti Monster goes to far and too weird.

neal · 03-13-09 4:50 pm

To propose to a kid that maybe gravity is as a result of something or somebody that enjoys touching you, is totally weird, when kids are cautioned about good and bad touching in school. Bob Neal, please reword your thoughts without the homosexual overtones. I'm pretty liberal here, but I'm not willing for these overtones to exist in this context. Edited -- admin. You are required to love him more than your wife and kids. In heaven you will be castrated and not have sex nor any desire for sex. You taught this baloney to your kids. Jesus is supposed to be IN you. Wasn't it some crazy SDA woman preacher that told women she had orgasms thinking about Jesus? If you ever get around to reading your holy book you will find that the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a really laid back dude in comparison. (Message edited by admin on March 15, 2009)

neal · 03-13-09 4:53 pm

Where was Ken Ham mentioned On their homepage. <a href="http://www.biblearchaeology.org/" target=_top>http://www.biblearchaeology.org/</a> They don't want kids under 12 to attend. Must be some real Jesus gay talk going on.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 5:05 pm

You mean this: <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:KEN HAM speaking at ABR's Annual Fundraising Banquet<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> That doesn't make him a member of this group. Sheeeeeeeeeeeeesh.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 5:09 pm

This was kind of "nice try" by Darwin himself, eh: <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!>quote:Pangenesis Pangenesis was Charles Darwin's hypothetical mechanism for heredity. He presented this 'provisional hypothesis' in his 1868 work The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication and felt that it brought 'together a multitude of facts which are at present left disconnected by any efficient cause'. The etymology of the word comes from the Greek words pan (a prefix meaning "whole", "encompassing") and genesis (birth) or genos (origin). Pangenesis holds that body cells shed gemmules, which collect in the reproductive organs prior to fertilization. Thus every cell in the body has a 'vote' in the constitution of the offspring. Atavisms arise due to the awaking of long-dormant gemmules, while limbs regenerate due to the activation of gemmules from the missing limb. Pangenesis itself is now seen as deeply flawed and not supported by observation, yet it represents Darwin's attempt to explain such diverse phenomena as: <ul><li>atavisms, <LI>the intermediate nature of hybrids (blending inheritance), <LI>Lamarckian use and disuse, and <LI>limb regeneration.</li></ul> <!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangenesis" target=_top>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangenesis</a> Was he just joking or proven wrong???

neal · 03-13-09 5:10 pm

I don't see them inviting Hitchens or Dawkins! I have seen where Ray Comfort is trying to raise $100,000 to get an hour with Dawkins. That would be funny.

neal · 03-13-09 5:15 pm

Was he just joking or proven wrong??? If you read his works (I have not read the book you quoted) you will find that Darwin spends whole sections on what might be wrong with his theories. Some are wrong, and some have turned out to be true. That's the way science works. Unlike your goat herders that just said to believe it or else we will kill you. Scientists don't go around killing people that don't accept their theories. That chore is reserved for religious people.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 5:21 pm

No Hitchens just encourages anger and hostility, and lack of civility as he TRIES to make his points.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 5:26 pm

Neal said: <a href="http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=16&post=2974#POST2974" target=_top>http://www.atomorrow.net/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?t pc=16&post=2974#POST2974</a> I think you read the Holy Bible once too many times and took EGW a little too serious. I'm beginning to understand how you turned out so weird, but accepting atheism and dust and death as an alternative is even wacker!!!<img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/blush.gif" border=0>

neal · 03-13-09 5:33 pm

Bob Do you deny that you love a man more than your wife?

bob_2 · 03-13-09 5:44 pm

Neal, you have read the Bible too many times, that is why you questions are sick. Not to many normal people react to the Bible the way you do. Sex is not the be all end all, like it may be with you, eh??

neal · 03-13-09 6:04 pm

My questions are sick? If you don't think you're supposed to love Jesus more than your kids and your wife you need to get reading. Maybe its in one of the parts you haven't gotten around to reading yet. Aren't you 50-something? Get cracking man. Its funny for a christian that hasn't read the Bible to say that someone who has read the Bible multiple times is the reason the opponent has weird ideas. Like, maybe that's what is needed in order to be a christian- not read the Bible. Just make up stuff and believe you have a religious idea and life. That, Bob, is not rational thinking. You are arguing that my point is wrong because I am not ignorant like yourself. That ranks right up there at the top of how to argue like a idiot. (Message edited by neal on March 13, 2009)

neal · 03-13-09 6:05 pm

you questions are sick They are Biblical.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 6:15 pm

Edited -- admin. (Message edited by admin on March 16, 2009)

neal · 03-13-09 6:25 pm

Kinda tough to say you love a Dude more than your wife? Bummer that having that belief is one of the rules for getting into your heaven. Hey, maybe we can roast together!

bob_2 · 03-13-09 6:44 pm

Whatever fantasy is rolling around in your head after reading the Bible four times, that's scary.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 6:46 pm

Ryan, rules, if he wants the comparison between Christianity and whatever you are selling, that's up to Ryan.

neal · 03-13-09 7:35 pm

You have a whole section on NCT and now you are talking rules? You proselytize the John Knox "Hang The Blasphemers" Presbyterian Church. And you are talking rules?

elaine · 03-13-09 10:22 pm

When did the "Flood" occur? Most Bible literalists who count the genealogical record from the Genesis account, say it was 2348 B.C. HOWEVER, there is uninterrupted written historical records extending before that date in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley civilization (Middle East), the Nile Valley (in Egypt) and the Aegean civilizaion (Greece). Their written chains of history were unbroken by the flood. They failed to notice their own "destruction."

bob_2 · 03-13-09 10:45 pm

Elaine, sources, and Neal you can use your knowledge of reading the Bible four times for good or for evil. I think I know which you've choosen.

bob_2 · 03-13-09 11:16 pm

When the SDA church went dysfunctional here in St. Louis, we looked for a church that would take us into membership based on salvific issues. We found it in the PCA Presbyterian Church. My daughter accepted Christ, and both daughters were baptized. There is a lot of doctrine of Calvin and the Westminister Confession that I can not accept. I am not proslytzing anyone. If someone is leaving the SDA church as Tom was sharing, I said it was a good church to learn a lot from, and when they understood it all, if worship brought no more joy, move on to something like the Calvary Chapel that is extremely close to the SDA church, IMO, from what i have studied. Neal the difference between me and you, I am pro Christianity, you are pro Atheist. Your discription above ought to be removed from the forum, but knowing Ryan, he will probably leave it. Maybe it's good to see an Atheist describe Christianity in the terms you do, almost in a homosexual way. Let's see the kind of guts Ryan has.

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#26 03-13-09 4:17 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#27 03-13-09 4:32 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#28 03-13-09 4:33 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#29 03-13-09 4:34 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#30 03-13-09 4:45 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#31 03-13-09 4:50 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#32 03-13-09 4:53 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#33 03-13-09 5:05 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#34 03-13-09 5:09 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#35 03-13-09 5:10 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#36 03-13-09 5:15 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#37 03-13-09 5:21 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#38 03-13-09 5:26 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#39 03-13-09 5:33 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#40 03-13-09 5:44 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#41 03-13-09 6:04 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#42 03-13-09 6:05 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#43 03-13-09 6:15 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#44 03-13-09 6:25 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#45 03-13-09 6:44 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#46 03-13-09 6:46 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#47 03-13-09 7:35 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#48 03-13-09 10:22 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#49 03-13-09 10:45 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

#50 03-13-09 11:16 pm

Re: 50 Reasons to Reject Evolution

Board footer