Religions > Atheism > Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com?
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jim Spaza" |
| Date: |
10 Jun 2005 04:20:04 PM |
| Object: |
Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
This challenge was issued by GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825.
What is wrong with the Christian apologetic website
www.answersingenesis.com ???
Please be courteous and specific.
.
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 01:14:34 PM |
|
|
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the world,
and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history. If any of
these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that the Bible may
be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no fan
of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders on
philosophy.
Which is completely irrelevant to my point. Religions are about
revelation from the supernatural; either that, or (a) they're completely
made up or (b) they're completely naturalistic. (A) is fiction, (b) is
science, and revelation from the supernatural is either perfect and
infallible, or it is deceptive and diabolical. Theology is the
iterative process of gnashing one's mental faculties on revelation in an
effort to make it perfect and infallible.
If any revelatory text makes either historical or naturalistic
claims, those claims can be compared to the real world to determine if
they're infallible and perfect-- or not. If they're not, no amount of
excuse will change the facts.
The Bible, the Koran, the Bagavahd Ghita, etc., all make
historical and naturalistic claims. Where they do, they are primarily
failures.
Elf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu the Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
11 Jun 2005 09:48:33 AM |
|
|
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplin and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
Perhaps christians are enslaved by sin, but the rest of us tend to get
enslaved by christians.
-- Dave Fried
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hayes" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
11 Jun 2005 11:31:36 AM |
|
|
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
Actually, that is not so since philosophy is simply the reasoning of
beliefs. There is a difference in what philosophy and what we call
"natural science" covers.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu the Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
11 Jun 2005 01:44:56 PM |
|
|
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118507496.096345.236430@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to
conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their
theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders
on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
Actually, that is not so since philosophy is simply the reasoning of
beliefs. There is a difference in what philosophy and what we call
"natural science" covers.
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology creates
a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful blindness to a
predetermined end.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplin and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
Perhaps christians are enslaved by sin, but the rest of us tend to get
enslaved by christians.
-- Dave Fried
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hayes" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 02:26:07 AM |
|
|
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118507496.096345.236430@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to
conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their
theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders
on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
Actually, that is not so since philosophy is simply the reasoning of
beliefs. There is a difference in what philosophy and what we call
"natural science" covers.
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology creates
a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful blindness to a
predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu the Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 08:06:41 AM |
|
|
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118561167.052759.319640@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology
creates a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful
blindness to a predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
That wasn't "education", it was "indoctrination". And those who've had
an education know the difference. Even the Catholic church calls it
indoctrination.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplin and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
Nothing [Bush] does can be challenged on moral grounds, however unethical
or evil it might appear, because all of his actions are directed by God.
He can twist the truth, oppress the poor, exalt the rich, despoil the
earth, ignore the law--and murder children--without the slightest
compunction, the briefest moment of doubt or self-reflection, because he
believes, he truly believes, that God squats in his brainpan and tells
him what to do.
-- Chris Floyd, CounterPunch, 7/30/03
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hayes" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 02:28:38 PM |
|
|
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118561167.052759.319640@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology
creates a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful
blindness to a predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
That wasn't "education", it was "indoctrination". And those who've had
an education know the difference. Even the Catholic church calls it
indoctrination.
Not necessarily. In some cases, theology is hard to tell from
philosophy (since you can't prove either, unless you're talking about
formal logic). In fact, many of the greatest philosophers in the
Middle Ages were also theologians.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu the Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 08:07:24 PM |
|
|
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118690918.253988.135620@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118561167.052759.319640@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology
creates a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful
blindness to a predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
That wasn't "education", it was "indoctrination". And those who've
had
an education know the difference. Even the Catholic church calls it
indoctrination.
Not necessarily. In some cases, theology is hard to tell from
philosophy (since you can't prove either, unless you're talking about
formal logic). In fact, many of the greatest philosophers in the
Middle Ages were also theologians.
Yes, necessarily. A philosopher can fallow the argument and the evidence
wherever they lead. A theologian must end at God. If logic and evidence
lead him elsewhere, he is no longer a theologian.
And what "great philosophers" of the middle ages were theologians? There
were none, because they were all theologians, and were not free to think.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplin and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession.
-- Abraham Lincoln
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 09:06:26 AM |
|
|
On 12 Jun 2005 00:26:07 -0700, "Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com>
wrote:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118507496.096345.236430@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to
conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their
theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders
on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
Actually, that is not so since philosophy is simply the reasoning of
beliefs. There is a difference in what philosophy and what we call
"natural science" covers.
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology creates
a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful blindness to a
predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
You obviously haven't had any if you imagine theology has any validity
at all.
It is metaphorically the study of the number of hairs in Santa Claus'
beard based on the presumption that Santa Claus really does have a
magic flying sleigh.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hayes" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 02:31:13 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On 12 Jun 2005 00:26:07 -0700, "Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com>
wrote:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118507496.096345.236430@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to
conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their
theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders
on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
Actually, that is not so since philosophy is simply the reasoning of
beliefs. There is a difference in what philosophy and what we call
"natural science" covers.
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology creates
a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful blindness to a
predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
You obviously haven't had any if you imagine theology has any validity
at all.
So I guess Ockham, Aquinas, and Augustine are all names nobody educated
knows about, eh? While you may be an atheist, but you can only argue
in bumper stickers.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 03:31:00 PM |
|
|
On 13 Jun 2005 12:31:13 -0700, "Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com>
wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology creates
a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful blindness to a
predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
You obviously haven't had any if you imagine theology has any validity
at all.
So I guess Ockham, Aquinas, and Augustine are all names nobody educated
knows about, eh?
Where did I say that, moron? Clue: you're attacking a strawman of your
own invention. Please try to be less dishonest next time.
Is it really so hard to grasp that theology is irrelevant in the real
world outside your religion?
While you may be an atheist, but you can only argue
in bumper stickers.
And you can only argue by inventing things that weren't said in order
to attack them, and then lie about "argue in bumper stickers".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hayes" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 03:31:42 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On 13 Jun 2005 12:31:13 -0700, "Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com>
wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology creates
a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful blindness to a
predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
You obviously haven't had any if you imagine theology has any validity
at all.
So I guess Ockham, Aquinas, and Augustine are all names nobody educated
knows about, eh?
Where did I say that, moron?
Look above, liar-boy.
[usual whining snipped]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
13 Jun 2005 03:58:40 PM |
|
|
On 13 Jun 2005 13:31:42 -0700, "Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com>
wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On 13 Jun 2005 12:31:13 -0700, "Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com>
wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology creates
a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful blindness to a
predetermined end.
If you say so. Those who have had *education* know better.
You obviously haven't had any if you imagine theology has any validity
at all.
So I guess Ockham, Aquinas, and Augustine are all names nobody educated
knows about, eh?
Where did I say that, moron?
Look above, liar-boy.
Point it out, deliberately nasty in-your-face liar.
Or do you hionestly not understand what "has no validity" means,
moron?
[usual whining snipped]
Pretends the in-your-face liar who dismisses what he doesn't like as
whining because it gives him an excuse to ignore it.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
11 Jun 2005 01:48:10 PM |
|
|
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118507496.096345.236430@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to
conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their
theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders
on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
Actually, that is not so since philosophy is simply the reasoning of
beliefs. There is a difference in what philosophy and what we call
"natural science" covers.
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology creates
a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful blindness to a
predetermined end.
Observation: Pen falls to the ground
Philosophy: Some force must have pulled it down, which leads to:
Science: The force that pulls it down is gravity, which is caused by the
size of the earth and its rotation.
Theology: God pulled it down, which leads to...wait, that's the end, innit?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 12:30:29 AM |
|
|
DanielSan wrote:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118507496.096345.236430@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to
conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their
theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders
on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
Actually, that is not so since philosophy is simply the reasoning of
beliefs. There is a difference in what philosophy and what we call
"natural science" covers.
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology
creates a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful
blindness to a predetermined end.
Observation: Pen falls to the ground
Philosophy: Some force must have pulled it down, which leads to:
Science: The force that pulls it down is gravity, which is caused by the
size of the earth and its rotation.
Theology: God pulled it down, which leads to...wait, that's the end, innit?
<Duke mode>
God created gravity! It's all God's work!
Kneel! Repent! Flagellate!
</Duke mode>
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 01:50:21 AM |
|
|
Olrik wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118507496.096345.236430@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> wrote in
news:1118462070.105285.64690@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Elf M. Sternberg wrote:
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to
conflict,
but they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their
theology
off as "science."
I beg to differ. The Bible makes claims about the real
world.
It makes claims about the shape of the world, the origin of the
world, and the nature of the world. It makes claims about history.
If any of these claims is false, then it is rational to claim that
the Bible may be false in its entirety-- and there is no way to
refute this claim.
Except that Christianity is not the only theistic religion. I'm no
fan of the Bible, but theology (which is outside the Bible) borders
on
philosophy.
No more than astrology borders on astronomy or numerology borders on
mathematics.
Actually, that is not so since philosophy is simply the reasoning of
beliefs. There is a difference in what philosophy and what we call
"natural science" covers.
No. Philosophy follows a line of reasoning to its end. Theology
creates a series of rationalizations, half truths, and willful
blindness to a predetermined end.
Observation: Pen falls to the ground
Philosophy: Some force must have pulled it down, which leads to:
Science: The force that pulls it down is gravity, which is caused by
the size of the earth and its rotation.
Theology: God pulled it down, which leads to...wait, that's the end,
innit?
<Duke mode>
God created gravity! It's all God's work!
Kneel! Repent! Flagellate!
</Duke mode>
I have to admit, I had to look up the term "flaggelate." I doubt that
duke would use this word. It's, like, too big for him. ;-)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 09:04:35 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 06:50:21 GMT, DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com>
wrote:
I have to admit, I had to look up the term "flaggelate." I doubt that
duke would use this word. It's, like, too big for him. ;-)
I always thought the flagellant monks must have been mad.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 11:20:02 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 06:50:21 GMT, DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com>
wrote:
Olrik wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
Enkidu the Atheist wrote:
snip
I have to admit, I had to look up the term "flaggelate." I doubt that
duke would use this word. It's, like, too big for him. ;-)
He would think that it was something patriotic.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
12 Jun 2005 06:08:20 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 06:50:21 GMT, DanielSan <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote:
Olrik wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
<Duke mode>
God created gravity! It's all God's work!
Kneel! Repent! Flagellate!
</Duke mode>
I have to admit, I had to look up the term "flaggelate." I doubt that
duke would use this word. It's, like, too big for him. ;-)
I thought he had just mis-spelt, masturbate.
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling, Like any opinion stated here,
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
11 Jun 2005 01:48:44 AM |
|
|
"Chris Hayes" <hayes12@fadmail.com> writes:
osprey wrote:
Jon. wrote:
osprey wrote:
Chris Hayes wrote:
Jim Spaza wrote:
This challenge was issued by GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825.
What is wrong with the Christian apologetic website
www.answersingenesis.com ???
Please be courteous and specific.
Considering that the Book of Genesis has two different creation
stories which contradict each other, it wouldn't take a genius to
figure out the site is run by people who don't care about the truth.
There are no "answers in Genesis", for the Bible is not a science
book.
I don't recall anyone EVER saying the Bible was a science book.
And that would be the *next* problem with Answers In Genesis.
I never claimed that Genesis has all the answers; however, I am saying
that I think theology and science can work in cooperation and not
always attacking each other.
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to conflict, but
they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their theology off as
"science."
Bobby's not much for actually learning from history.
Just as I can't "prove" to you that God exist, you can't "prove" to me
that God doesn't exist.
Nobody has to prove God doesn't exist. Burden of proof always goes on
the positive claimant.
You're dealing with someone who went to the trouble of looking for people with
a name similar to mine who had criminal records - and after finding one who's
doing time in a prison in Illinois, he went around proclaiming that he had
proved that "Patrick L. Humphrey" had been convicted. He just "forgot" to
mention that the one doing time wasn't me - despite the fact that my
namesake's middle name was one I've never had. That should give you an idea
of the mentality you're trying to reason with...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (soon to be TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Chicago 5, Houston 3 (April 26)
NEXT GAME: Date/opponent/site TBA in August 2005
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
10 Jun 2005 06:05:17 PM |
|
|
Chris Hayes wrote:
osprey wrote:
Jon. wrote:
osprey wrote:
Chris Hayes wrote:
Jim Spaza wrote:
This challenge was issued by GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825.
What is wrong with the Christian apologetic website
www.answersingenesis.com ???
Please be courteous and specific.
Considering that the Book of Genesis has two different creation stories
which contradict each other, it wouldn't take a genius to figure out
the site is run by people who don't care about the truth. There are no
"answers in Genesis", for the Bible is not a science book.
I don't recall anyone EVER saying the Bible was a science book.
And that would be the *next* problem with Answers In Genesis.
I never claimed that Genesis has all the answers; however, I am saying
that I think theology and science can work in cooperation and not
always attacking each other.
Both deal with *different* subjects. They don't have to conflict, but
they inevitably will when somebody wants to pass their theology off as
"science."
I don't recall anyone trying to pass off theology as science
Just as I can't "prove" to you that God exist, you can't "prove" to me
that God doesn't exist.
Nobody has to prove God doesn't exist. Burden of proof always goes on
the positive claimant.
Well, I am going to be straight up and call this one as I see it.
That's a cop out and just an excuse to evade any type of "burden of
proof".
Let me ask you something.
Do you think there is something else after death? Such as a spiritual
place, or possibly reincarnation?
I don't know what happens after death; however, I do think it is highly
possible that we do have a "spirit" that does live on. When I think of
spirit, I think the spirit is a mass of energy. We know that our bodies
consist of energy, and we also know with science energy never dies.
I am not going to get into too much of a philosophical debate, you
choose to think what you want and believe. I am just asking your
opinion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Niels van der Linden" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
10 Jun 2005 07:57:14 PM |
|
|
Do you think there is something else after death? Such as a spiritual
place, or possibly reincarnation?
No, that's just wishful thinking.
I don't know what happens after death; however, I do think it is highly
possible that we do have a "spirit" that does live on. When I think of
spirit, I think the spirit is a mass of energy. We know that our bodies
consist of energy, and we also know with science energy never dies.
I am not going to get into too much of a philosophical debate, you
choose to think what you want and believe. I am just asking your
opinion.
Did you know the conscious is basically subconscious, which is like ripples
in a pond? And that we actually have a major problem having any (if any)
control over our subconscious? And that the subconscious is basically status
+ input = output? Just before you (think you) decide to do something, there
already is activity building up. Al sensory input gets tossed into the
subconscious and might lead to actions.
The evolution from sponge to mammal (0 to complex nervous system) doesn't
have an *insert-soul-please-moment*; it's just a gradually increasing
consciousness (ultimately to *self*consciousness). Ever seen an ant wander
off purpously for some alone-time? Nope; it's just your typical
*must-find-food* syndrome (or whatever kind of ant it is). Ever seen a
news-coverage | | |
