God is not religion/Religion is not God

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

My father used to say that, as he lashed hot mustard on his ham. It's more of an imperialist attitude than anything else. If your ingredients are rotten it will be foul, no matter how spicy you make it.

What u say sounds plausible, tho of uncertain veracity.

I have been poisoned by food that tasted very good
(most recently, last summer in Portland, Oregon).

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

That's not the same as rotten ingredients. Rotten meat can be cooked to kill off the bacteria, it won't poison you, but it will taste disgusting. Poor hygene can contaminate fresh ingredients with e-coli and poison you.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Thank u for that information.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

izzythepush wrote:
My father used to say that, as he lashed hot mustard on his ham. It's more of an imperialist attitude than anything else. If your ingredients are rotten it will be foul, no matter how spicy you make it.
What u say sounds plausible, tho of uncertain veracity.

I have been poisoned by food that tasted very good
(most recently, last summer in Portland, Oregon).

Poisoned apple, put the mind to sleep.

0 Replies

@voiceindarkness,

The winner of the debate is not under the purview of the participants. There is a panel of judges. I think that Dawkins waas kickin yer ass and then realized you were a lightweight. Anybody who thinks hes a deity is already toofucked up to make any cogent points.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Maybe he screamed Dawkins down, until Dawkins quit in disgust.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Usually the YECs have no arrows in their quiver besides an unshaking belief in the inerrancy of one book of which there are several versions, hence the HExapian presentation of the OT.
Course, I have a volume of Darwins "Origin of the SPecies..." also presented with a line by line comparison of each of his six editions. SOrt of a Darwinian Hexapia. The only difference is that anyone can evidence and prove what Darwin says.
I think the author of this thread is unaware of what he was even posing, if he did indeed attempt to debate R Dawkins. Biblical inerrancy does not easily make friends with scientific investigation. GOOD GOD what if they would find something in error? So, its just best not to look at all.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Usually the YECs have no arrows in their quiver besides an unshaking belief in the inerrancy of one book of which there are several versions, hence the HExapian presentation of the OT.
Course, I have a volume of Darwins "Origin of the SPecies..." also presented with a line by line comparison of each of his six editions. SOrt of a Darwinian Hexapia. The only difference is that anyone can evidence and prove what Darwin says.
I think the author of this thread is unaware of what he was even posing, if he did indeed attempt to debate R Dawkins. Biblical inerrancy does not easily make friends with scientific investigation. GOOD GOD what if they would find something in error? So, its just best not to look at all.

I wasn't debating the Bible, I was debating scientific theory. He couldn't pull his head out of his ass on his their is no God theory, that's all he was interested in.
You can read my theory on my thread...
Big Bang or a Stretch of God's Imagination?
Forums: Big Bang, Speculation

1 Reply

@voiceindarkness,

Quote:

I wasn't debating the Bible, I was debating scientific theory. He couldn't pull his head out of his ass on his their is no God theory, that's all he was interested in.

When you engage a conversation with "I was debating scientific theory" and then claim that the other side was being intractable because he wouldnt accept a god as the causitive element of the Universe is sophism. All youre doing is setting the rules by your definitions alone. Thats certainly not a debate. Its shouting down your opponent.
Im guessing that you didnt listen to any of his points and consider the roles that evidence and scientific discoveries play.

How bout you set up a debate and then only include points of fact and items that can be concluded by evidence?

0 Replies

You're dealin' with a joker who says he is Jesus, there, FM. Keep that in mind when you're asking for evidence.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

You're dealin' with a joker who says he is Jesus, there, FM. Keep that in mind when you're asking for evidence.

I'm dealin with jokers who say I'm not Jesus. I'm not here to prove who I am, I'm here to tell the world whats up. Keep that in mind when you're asking for evidence. Wink

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

You're dealin' with a joker who says he is Jesus, there, FM. Keep that in mind when you're asking for evidence.

Be fair, he might just be claiming to be Mexican.

0 Replies

@voiceindarkness,

Why would anyone with two brain cells to rub together think you know what's up?

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Im not gonna jump on the pile just yet cause Id like to pursue the statement that DAwkins gave up in a debate re "Science".

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Im not gonna jump on the pile just yet cause Id like to pursue the statement that DAwkins gave up in a debate re "Science".

He wouldn't even try to open his eyes to see what I was saying. He is blinded by his own bias, against the existence of an intelligent God. So he wouldn't engage in a civil conversation. Just like I am experiencing in this forum. Neutral

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Why would anyone with two brain cells to rub together think you know what's up?

Stop rubbing your two brain cells together and try listening. Smile

Be careful, if you rub them together too much, you might start a fire. Laughing

1 Reply

@voiceindarkness,

voiceindarkness wrote:

I'm not here to prove who I am, I'm here to tell the world whats up.

That's why nobody is listening to you. You have to earn respect before anyone will care what you say, and haven't done that yet. Quite the contrary, you've pretty well shot yourself in the foot. And to make matters worse, you've tried to cover it up by acting like it was intentional.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

voiceindarkness wrote:
I'm not here to prove who I am, I'm here to tell the world whats up.
That's why nobody is listening to you. You have to earn respect before anyone will care what you say, and haven't done that yet. Quite the contrary, you've pretty well shot yourself in the foot. And to make matters worse, you've tried to cover it up by acting like it was intentional.

That's the beauty of it all, I don't give a **** what you think of me. Did you shoot yourself in the head? And just how have you earned the right to respect, Go ahead, enlighten us with all of your wisdom. You must have all of the answers, please enlighten me with truth. Neutral

0 Replies

@voiceindarkness,

What's to listen to? You babble nonsense. You string words together, i assume because you think they make you sound wise. They don't. They reveal your idiocy.

0 Replies

@voiceindarkness,

What I hear is that YOU, similarly, were only willing to consider your worldview when discussing science with DAwkins. We all know re Dawkins sometimes abrasive manner. However. he does remind us that science makes no room for mythology that cannot be tested or falsified. I dont see anything in your posts that constitutes compelling evidence. You seem to always ignore evidence and only default back to a Biblical interpretation.

I can tell you that, of the about 6 versions of Genesis, none get the scientific order of evolution correct. Genesis versions (all of them) seem to point out that life on the planet ws installed in a very short time and that all living things are all contemporaries and not descendants. Where's the evidence for that?.

1 Reply

God is not religion/Religion is not God

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know