Jump to content

Evolution is Just Junk Science


Recommended Posts

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <040kj4-ofp.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

<kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

> [snips]

>

> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 19:58:23 -0700, Jason wrote:

>

>

> >> I'm not interested - I'm just proving you that you were wrong when you

> >> stated that a history of witchcraft was being taught as a college

course. A

> >> history class about the Salem witch trials is NOT the same thing.

> >

> > In one of the states, they want to teach a high school class entitled,

> > "The Bible as History". Would you be in favor of a state high school

> > teaching such a course?

>

> "The Bible _as_ history" suggests the usage of the Bible, rather than

> other texts, to define at least some portion of history; this strikes me

> as a poor idea. "The Bible _in_ History", however, would presumably

> examine what we do know of history - from many sources - and where the

> Bible's historical writings fit - or don't - within the rest.

>

> What matters is the content, though, not the name. Knowing just the

> title, we lack sufficient information to agree or disagree with the course.

>

> On the other hand, if a college wants to offer religious studies of

> whatever sort for the students who are religious - or curious - fine, go

> for it, as long as they're not required and don't impact on real subjects.

 

I found the article about it on the web:

 

 

 

Dear Friend

 

A program is underway to serve the public through educational efforts

concerning a First Amendment right and religious freedom issue. This is to

bring a state certified Bible course (elective) into the public high

schools nationwide.

 

The curriculum for the program shows a concern to convey the content of

the Bible as compared to literature and history. The program is concerned

with education rather than indoctrination of students. The central

approach of the class is simply to study the Bible as a foundation

document of society, and that approach is altogether appropriate in a

comprehensive program of secular education.

 

The world is watching to see if we will be motivated to impact our

culture, to deal with the moral crises in our society, and reclaim our

families and children.

 

Please help us to restore our religious and civil liberties in this nation.

 

President's Signature

 

Elizabeth Ridenour

President NCBCPS

To date, our Bible curriculum has been voted into 395 school districts in

37 states. Over 190,000 students have already taken this course

nationwide, on the high school campus, during school hours, for credit.

 

 

 

 

 

Chuck Norris: Bringing the Bible back into schools (WorldNet Daily)

 

Three hundred eighty-two public school districts have voted to implement a

course on it.

 

Over 1,350 schools in 37 states can now offer it as a textbook.

 

Approximately 190,000 students have already been taught from it as a

course curriculum.

 

I'm talking about the Bible in public school. It's no joke! And I want to

help you get a course on it offered in your school district, too.

 

The Bible is big news!

 

Over the past few years dozens of news agencies from all over our nation

have reported on the re-entry of Bible curriculum back into classrooms.

 

Just this past week, Time ran a cover story, "Why we should teach the

Bible in public school."

 

Georgia's Legislature approved and is preparing its 180 school districts

to offer two literature classes on the Bible.

 

More than 800 Craig, Colo., residents are petitioning to get an elective

class at Moffat County High School on the history and literature of the

Bible.

 

In my own state of Texas, the House Public Education Committee is

presently considering requiring the state's 1,700 school districts to

offer history and literature courses using the Bible as the primary text.

 

Liberal attacks on Bible curriculum

 

Of course, liberal groups are fighting at great expense to keep the Bible

from being taught in public classrooms.

 

The Texas Freedom Network, or TFN, is one of them

  • Replies 19.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Kelsey Bjarnason
Posted

[snips]

 

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:15:44 -0700, Jason wrote:

> I posted information about a man that was healed by God.

 

No, you didn't. You posted a story about a man who was healed. You

completely failed to demonstrate that God even exists , let alone had any

part in the healing, other than by fiat of assertion.

 

Try again. This time think before posting.

 

 

 

--

WINE: A fermented concoction of the Devil, drunk by Christians during

Communion. - Marty Leipzig

Guest Kelsey Bjarnason
Posted

[snips]

 

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 19:14:21 -0700, Jason wrote:

> I have a copy of the November 2004 issue of National Geographic magazine.

> On page 6, poll results were mentioned. "According to a Gallup Pole that

> was conducted in Feb., 2001, no less than 45 percent of responding US

> adults agreed that God created humans pretty much in their present form

> within the last 10,000 years or so." ...."Only 12 percent believed that

> humans evolved from other life forms without any involvement from God."

>

> It appears to me that more people in America agree with me than agree with

> you. In fact, only about 12 percent of Americans agree with you.

 

 

Are you really so stupid you think that you can vote God into existence?

 

--

“What is gained by fear will be lost when fear abates.” - Ghandi

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <snke63pmk02p0duvs8voj8oaf4o9ejbjdc@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

<lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:15:44 -0700, in alt.atheism

> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> <Jason-0606071815450001@66-52-22-48.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >In article <ofojj4-ofp.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

> ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

> >

> >> [snips]

> >>

> >> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 21:32:07 -0700, Jason wrote:

> >>

> >> >> >The point was related to evidence related to God. If there is evidence

> >> >> >from many different ancient civilizations that those people believed in

> >> >> >God or Gods

> >>

> >> > The sun God Shamash is mentioned in the law code of Hammurabi.

> >>

> >> All this shows is that some people believe in gods. We know that. The

> >> question at hand is not whether some people believe in gods, but whether

> >> there is evidence that gods actually exist. Try again.

> >

> >

> >I posted information about a man that was healed by God. My point related

> >to the sun God Shamash was that people from many different cultures

> >(during ancient times) believed in God. Have you ever wondered why that

> >was true? I wondered about it and came to the conclusion that it was

> >because people that were alive during ancient times learned about God from

> >what is known as "oral tradition". This simply means that people from the

> >first generation passed stories about God to their children and those

> >children (when they became adults) passed the stories to their children,

> >etc. There is a section in the back of my study Bible entitled, "The

> >Greatest Archeological Discoveries of the 20th Century and their effects

> >on the Bible". I read that section and learned that most of the people in

> >ancient times believed in God or Gods. My conclusion was that they

> >believed in God because of the messages they received from the first

> >generation of people that had actually known Adam, Eve and the children of

> >Adam and Eve.

> >Jason

> >

> I can see why you defend liars like the ICR. You have no interest in

> evidence or reality.

 

I have a copy of the November 2004 issue of National Geographic magazine.

On page 6, poll results were mentioned. "According to a Gallup Pole that

was conducted in Feb., 2001, no less than 45 percent of responding US

adults agreed that God created humans pretty much in their present form

within the last 10,000 years or so." ...."Only 12 percent believed that

humans evolved from other life forms without any involvement from God."

 

It appears to me that more people in America agree with me than agree with

you. In fact, only about 12 percent of Americans agree with you.

Guest cactus
Posted

Jason wrote:

> In article <040kj4-ofp.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

> <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> [snips]

>>

>> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 19:58:23 -0700, Jason wrote:

>>

>>

>>>> I'm not interested - I'm just proving you that you were wrong when you

>>>> stated that a history of witchcraft was being taught as a college

> course. A

>>>> history class about the Salem witch trials is NOT the same thing.

>>> In one of the states, they want to teach a high school class entitled,

>>> "The Bible as History". Would you be in favor of a state high school

>>> teaching such a course?

>> "The Bible _as_ history" suggests the usage of the Bible, rather than

>> other texts, to define at least some portion of history; this strikes me

>> as a poor idea. "The Bible _in_ History", however, would presumably

>> examine what we do know of history - from many sources - and where the

>> Bible's historical writings fit - or don't - within the rest.

>>

>> What matters is the content, though, not the name. Knowing just the

>> title, we lack sufficient information to agree or disagree with the course.

>>

>> On the other hand, if a college wants to offer religious studies of

>> whatever sort for the students who are religious - or curious - fine, go

>> for it, as long as they're not required and don't impact on real subjects.

>

> I found the article about it on the web:

>

<snip advertising>

>

>

You are shilling for a right-wing, fundamentalist group that is trying

to foist its sectarian agenda on the taxpaying public. This is from

their website, http://www.tfn.org/religiousfreedom/biblecurriculum/ncbcps/

 

# Elizabeth Ridenour serves as president of NCBCPS. She previously

created God

Guest Kelsey Bjarnason
Posted

[snips]

 

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:45:45 -0700, Jason wrote:

> There may be even better theories in the years to come. They did not have

> any theories like this when I was in college in the 1970's.

 

In 1927, the Belgian priest Georges Lemaître was the first to propose that

the universe began with the explosion of a primeval atom. His proposal

came after observing the red shift in distant nebulas by astronomers to a

model of the universe based on relativity. Years later, Edwin Hubble found

experimental evidence to help justify Lemaître's theory. He found that

distant galaxies in every direction are going away from us with speeds

proportional to their distance.

 

The big bang was initially suggested because it explains why distant

galaxies are traveling away from us at great speeds. The theory also

predicts the existence of cosmic background radiation (the glow left over

from the explosion itself). The Big Bang Theory received its strongest

confirmation when this radiation was discovered in 1964 by Arno Penzias

and Robert Wilson, who later won the Nobel Prize for this discovery.

 

So... initially proposed in 1927... strongly validated in 1964... you were

saying?

 

 

--

Ssshhhh! People are discovering that you’re an imbecile. - Simon Ewins

Guest cactus
Posted

Jason wrote:

> In article <s4ee63l7m06snhrejmi5amp02dvhia4bjq@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>

>> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:04:19 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>> <Jason-0606071304200001@66-52-22-15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>>> In article <1181115259.911064.176680@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>>> Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> ...

>>

>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

>>>>

>>>> Aren't you embarassed by your lack of knowledge of physics? It's not

>>>> something a normal person would flaunt.

>>>>

>>>> Martin

>>> No--there are millions of us.

>>>

>> At times you seem to be proud of your ignorance. Apparently the Parable

>> of the Talents is one of Jesus' parables that you do not know.

>

> Do you believe that everyone that has never taken a college physics class

> is ignorant?

>

>

No. Most of them have enough sense not to flaunt their ignorance in

front of people who have.

Guest cactus
Posted

Jason wrote:

> In article <a1ee63phjvcf04li1dk3rsst5iinh8q642@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>

>> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 14:24:34 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>> <Jason-0606071424340001@66-52-22-15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>>> In article <prC9i.28164$JQ3.953@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

>>> <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:Jason-0506071933390001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>>>>> In article <lkub639s9o4sq1h4n626gtsm5qasut32su@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

>>>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 13:00:56 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

>>>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>>>>>> <Jason-0506071300570001@66-52-22-62.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>>>>>>> In article <f441ch$9ch$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>>>>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Jason wrote:

>>>>>>>>> In article <oppej4-agk.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

>>>>>>>>> <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> [snips]

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:54:11 -0700, Jason wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> I had one professor that had a Ph.D degree and I had no respect

>>>>> for that

>>>>>>>>>>> professor. I do respect Dr. Gish.

>>>>>>>>>> On what basis? What part of his long and well-documented history

>>>>> of lies,

>>>>>>>>>> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect?

>>>>>>>>> It's a long story so I won't bore you. The bottom line that she

>>>>>>>>> rediculed

>>>>>>>>> several other Christians and myself.

>>>>>>>> What part of "What part of his long and well-documented history of

>>>>>>>> lies,

>>>>>>>> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect?" did

> you seem

>>>>>>>> to

>>>>>>>> not comprehend?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> I.e. Kelsey wasn't asking why you didn't respect your professor but

>>>>>>>> was,

>>>>>>>> instead, asking why DO you respect Dr. Gish?

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> (And you claim to have a masters degree? In what? Illiteracy?)

>>>>>>> I respect Dr. Gish because of his accomplishments.

>>>>>> Claims like this cause me not to respect you because you are so easily

>>>>>> gulled, but refuse to admit it.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> I was present when he

>>>>>>> debated a science professor from the local state college. In my

> opinion,

>>>>>>> he won that debate.

>>>>>> You are wrong. Gish may have conned you, but he didn't win a debate.

>>>>> Unless you attended that same debate that I attended, how would you know.

>>>>

>>>> Because he knows Gish. Gish is a liar and a fraud. You can see that here:

>>>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cre-error.html

>>>>

>>>>>>> Those are two of the reasons that I respect him. I

>>>>>>> debated that same professor in his office the week before he

> debated Dr.

>>>>>>> Gish. He easily won the debate that he had with me. He probably

> believed

>>>>>>> that he could just as easily win the debate with Dr. Gish. However, Dr.

>>>>>>> Gish was an experienced debater and easily won the debate.

>>>>>> Gish lied. You bought his lies.

>>>> No comment Jason? We are asserting that Bullfrog Gish is a liar. We have

>>>> evidence to support that assertion. Yet you still respect him????

>>> Let's say that you lived in a different city than your father lived. You

>>> have a great deal of respect for your father. You meet someone that starts

>>> to tell you how evil your father is and that he had all sorts of evidence

>>> about your father.

>>>

>>> You would have two options:

>>> option 1: Agree agree that man and agree with the evidence.

>>> option 2: Continue to have respect for your father and disregard the

> evidence.

>>> I would choose option 2.

>>> option 2:

>> You have chosen to ally yourself with a liar and a con man who steals

>> from Christians by telling them lies that they want to hear. You are as

>> morally corrupt as Gish is.

>>

>> Are you actually paid by the ICR to be a shill for their lies? I don't

>> know of any other reason a supposed Christian would support a liar over

>> the truth.

>

> No--I am not paid by anyone.

 

They don't have to pay him. He and many other suckers pay them for the

privilege of announcing their willingness to believe anything if a

preacher says it.

>

>

Guest cactus
Posted

Jason wrote:

> In article <l5rjj4-ofp.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

> <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> [snips]

>>

>> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 12:09:25 -0700, Jason wrote:

>>

>>>> Then how do you know that god DID come to be?

>>> I see the evidence when I look at the stars in the sky or visit a state

>>> park.

>> So do I - I see evidence that stars and parks exist. Nothing about gods,

>> though.

>>

>>> I also know it when I see evidence that a person was healed of a

>>> terrible disease or disorder.

>> I see evidence they were healed; nothing implies gods, though.

>>

>> Oh, your cute little story, like all such, assumes God is a driveling

>> idiot, so it's not the sort of thing I'd tend to spew if I were a

>> believer. The notion God is such a complete fucking retard that he can't

>> figure out - despite being all-knowing - who needs healing unless he has

>> some snake-oil salesman to ring a bell and say "Here's one" makes God out

>> to be an incompetent, useless fuckup.

>>

>> 'Course, the fact he's also supposed to be all-powerful yet can't snap his

>> fingers and instantly heal people completely likewise makes him look like

>> a complete fuck-up.

>>

>> Fine, you've got a story which, if we accept it, makes God out to be an

>> incompetent idiot. Why you'd want to show us this isn't clear - giving up

>> your religion, are you?

>>

>> One thing I find really amusing about all these is that they never - and I

>> mean never - involve anything which would actually require a miraculous

>> intervention to explain; they are all, without exception, cases where the

>> most honest thing one can say about them is "Cure is currently unexplained."

>>

>> Want to impress us? Show us someone who has actually had a leg amputated

>> have it miraculously grow back, right there on stage. Oh, wait, never

>> happens. God, if he exists and is even half of what he's cracked up to

>> be, could do it in a heartbeat, yet it never ever EVER seems to actually

>> happen. You'll never find a case where there's something actually

>> interesting happening; it is always "Well, something happened, coulda been

>> gods, coulda been the meds finally working, coulda been any of a thousand

>> other things, who knows?" - yet we're supposed to conclude only one

>> possible explanation is allowed - the one that _assumes_ gods exist.

>

> Google "miracle healings" and you may be able to find some testimonies

> that will convince you that God is still healing people in much the same

> way that he healed people while Jesus was on this earth.

>

>

So who needs Jesus?

Guest Martin Phipps
Posted

On Jun 7, 2:44 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> The original list was published in 1997 but the list has probably been

> updated or changed during the past 10 years. I was shocked at the sites

> that appeared when I googled "Big Bang Problems." I visited one site that

> was probably created by an hard core atheist. His point (if I understood

> him successfully) was that the Big Bang theory was a conspiracy that was

> developed by Christians). The atheist believed the Christians developed

> the theory to convince people that was the method that God used to create

> the solar system. I only read the first paragraph so I might have

> misunderstood some of the details. I found that funny since some

> Christians do not believe the Big Bang theory is a valid theory.

 

The Catholic Church does. The big bang theory was originally proposed

by an ex-monk! This proves that scientists will endorse any theory

that is supported by actual evidence.

 

Do you have anything left to say?

 

Martin

Guest cactus
Posted

Jason wrote:

> In article <mYE9i.7$K8.6@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

> <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

>> news:Jason-0606071209250001@66-52-22-15.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>>> In article <f468ua$k2g$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>> Jason wrote:

>>>>> In article <f43nh2$vee$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> Jason wrote:

>>>>>>> In article <a829i.22312$KC4.2371@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

>>>>>>> <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>> That is true. I was wanting to go even further back into the

>>>>>>>>> history of

>>>>>>>>> the solar system than the Big Bang. I want to know how the mass of

>>> energy

>>>>>>>>> (that expanded during the Big Bang) came to be.

>>>>>>>>> If you don't know the answer--just tell me. Several people are

>>>>>>>>> trying

>>>>>>>>> there best to find reasons to avoid answering this question. One

>>>>>>>>> person

>>>>>>>>> was honest enough to say that he did not know the answer.

>>>>>>>>> Jason

>>>>>>>> Uhh...Jason, what is your definition of the solar system?

>>>>>>> source: Webster's Dictionary:

>>>>>>> solar system--the sun together with the group of celestial bodies

>>>>>>> that are

>>>>>>> held together by its attraction and revolve around it; also a similar

>>>>>>> system centered on another star.

>>>>>> Ok, so you can quote a dictionary. Now use that to understand how

>>>>>> meaningless "go even further back into the history of the solar system

>>>>>> than the Big Bang" is.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The big bang was NOT part of the history of the solar system since the

>>>>>> big bang happened 13 billion years ago (approx) and the solar system

>>>>>> formed 4.5-5 billion years ago (approx.)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Also, if you knew anything about the big bang, you'd know there was no

>>>>>> "further back" than it since time itself started at the big bang.

>>>>> Do you have evidence that "time started at the big bang"?

>>>> Yes. Read a book on cosmology or thermodynamics.

>>>>

>>>>>>> Are you trying to avoid answering my question: the question is

>>>>>>> How did the mass of energy that expanded during the Big Bang come to

>>>>>>> be?

>>>>>> We don't know. But if you claim that it came to be because of god then

>>>>>> "How did god come to be?"

>>>>> I don't know how God came to be.

>>>> Then how do you know that god DID come to be?

>>> I see the evidence when I look at the stars in the sky or visit a state

>>> park.

>>>

>>> I also know it when I see evidence that a person was healed of a terrible

>>> disease or disorder. Here is some evidence for you to consider:

>>>

>>>

>>> THE MIRACLE HEALING TESTIMONY

>>> OF WILLIAM A. KENT

>>> Giving all the Praise, Honor and Glory unto the Lord through whom this

>>> testimony is made possible this eleventh day of November 2000.

>>> Edited this 20th day of December to include the following quote from my

>>> Doctor, Dr. Dino Delaportas, MD

>>>

>>> "I rejoice in awe of you and the miracles the Lord has performed."

>>>

>>>

>>> My physician, as evidenced in the enclosed document, has confirmed the

>>> miracles I received from the Lord during a Faith and Victory Service at

>>> the World Harvest Church with Pastor Rod Parsley delivering the Word on

>>> November 5th, 2000.

>>>

>>> On Monday the 13th of May 1985 I was involved in a motorcycle v. train

>>> accident which resulted in a Closed Head Injury (massive traumatic brain

>>> injury), Ruptured Optic Nerve (right eye), and Spinal Injuries. These

>>> injuries left me a quadriplegic (no use of my lower extremities and only

>>> partial use of my right hand with no feeling on my entire right side)

>>> cognitive deficits and short-term memory loss. As you can imagine these

>>> injuries were tremendously life changing. However, being a Born Again

>>> Christian, as well as having been an Emergency Medical Technician for

>>> several years before my accident, I was better situated in overcoming my

>>> injuries and moving forward with my life.

>>>

>>> Although I was confined to a wheelchair I was able to continue through Him

>>> in my education at Salisbury State University, Hagerstown Junior College,

>>> and Prince George's Community College where I was a student in General

>>> Studies and Para-Legal Studies.

>>>

>>>

>>> While attending Salisbury State University in 1987, I became involved in

>>> wheelchair sports and excelled in Shooting. Over the next three years God

>>> blessed me with 39 Gold Medals, 14 Silver, and 3 Bronze and opportunities

>>> to compete in Regional, State, National, International, World

>>> Championships, and the 1988 Paralympics in Seoul, South Korea. During this

>>> time God also blessed me with 19 National and World Records.

>>>

>>> In 1993, while attending Prince George's Community College, I was blessed

>>> in an internship with Judge William D. Missouri the Administrative Judge

>>> of the Circuit Court for Prince George's County (the first such internship

>>> in the Para-Legal program).

>>>

>>> During the time between 1994 - June 2000, I went through a lot of turmoil

>>> in both my personal and professional life and was separated in faith

>>> through choice and ignorance - I thought I knew better without the Lord -

>>> was I ever wrong. This was perhaps the most destructive time in my life. I

>>> attempted suicide twice, lost the love of my life (so I thought), lost a

>>> business, and lots of friends.

>>>

>>> Finally in July 2000, due to circumstances beyond my control, I was stuck

>>> at my Sister-in-Christ's house with a broken down van. During this time I

>>> was lead back to the Lord and magnificent things started happening. I

>>> became so full of the Spirit that I lost control and have completely

>>> surrendered unto Him. I became active in the Church (The Tabernacle Church

>>> of Laurel, MD) and have been working on computers at the church since.

>>> About three weeks before the November 5th service at the World Harvest

>>> Church the Lord moved in me that I needed to be in Columbus, Ohio on

>>> November 5th. I didn't know why. I didn't know anyone in Columbus nor had

>>> I ever heard of Pastor Rod Parsley or the World Harvest Church. Then about

>>> two weeks later I saw in infomercial about a Dept Burning Service at the

>>> World Harvest Church and the fact that the church was located in Columbus,

>>> Ohio. The Lord immediately came over me and led me to call the church

>>> right then to get the information, which ultimately lead to my being there

>>> on November 5th.

>>>

>>> On the evening of Thursday, November 2nd I went to service at the

>>> Tabernacle Church in Laurel, MD and gave testimony that the Lord had

>>> placed it on my heart that I was to go to the World Harvest Church in

>>> Columbus, Ohio and that I was to receive a healing - just what healing I

>>> didn't know as I had several ailments. Pastor Gurley then prayed over me

>>> for a healing that manifested the next morning with the feeling being

>>> restored to my right hand. Later that Thursday evening Pastor Gurley took

>>> an offering in order that my gas be covered to get me to Columbus -

>>> otherwise, without this blessing from God, I would not have been able to

>>> receive the awesome blessing that the Lord has provided.

>>>

>>> Upon arrival at the World Harvest Church I called into the church from the

>>> parking lot, on my cell phone to speak with Ed McKee to see if there was

>>> some type accommodation that I may freshen up after my more than 400 mile

>>> drive. During this conversation I was informed that Ed was not there and

>>> that I had called in on the Prayer Line and the offer was extended for

>>> prayer. I accepted the offer and during this prayer a burning sensation

>>> came over my feet and I knew that the Lord was once again at work in my

>>> body and at that point I declared through Him that I would be healed and

>>> that I would accept His blessing that would enable me to walk. I revealed

>>> this to the prayer partner and asked that she keep an eye out for this

>>> miracle and then come shake my hand afterward so that I may meet her and

>>> thank her for agreeing in this healing.

>>>

>>> During the service at the World Harvest Church on November 5th Pastor

>>> Parsley called all those with diabetes to come forward - and while I was

>>> up there the Pastor named several other afflictions and during this time I

>>> could feel the Lord working on my body and when I went to adjust myself in

>>> my wheelchair one of your ushers asked if I was trying to get out of my

>>> chair - and before I had a chance to respond the Spirit took control and

>>> spoke through me and said "I'm going to jump out of this chair in thirty

>>> seconds" - well guess what? - in thirty seconds I was standing for the

>>> first time in 15 1

Guest Kelsey Bjarnason
Posted

[snips]

 

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:52:07 -0700, Jason wrote:

> Google "miracle healings" and you may be able to find some testimonies

> that will convince you that God is still healing people in much the same

> way that he healed people while Jesus was on this earth.

 

 

No, I won't. What I'll find is people who assert "God dunnit". Not a

one of them demonstrates that God even exists , let alone demonstrates he

was the actual cause of the healing.

 

Try to grasp this concept, Jason... I don't need to "google miracle

healings" as if this is something new to me. I've been involved in these

debates for decades . I've probably read about ten times as many

healings as you have. Not a single one of them established the claims by

evidence; they all ended up the same way: trying to simply assert God

into existence.

 

 

--

Lie, Billy. Lie for the lord. - Martin Goldberg

Guest cactus
Posted

Jason wrote:

> In article <prC9i.28164$JQ3.953@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

> <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

>> news:Jason-0506071933390001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>>> In article <lkub639s9o4sq1h4n626gtsm5qasut32su@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

>>> <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>>>

>>>> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 13:00:56 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>>>> <Jason-0506071300570001@66-52-22-62.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>>>>> In article <f441ch$9ch$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

>>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> Jason wrote:

>>>>>>> In article <oppej4-agk.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

>>>>>>> <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> [snips]

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:54:11 -0700, Jason wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> I had one professor that had a Ph.D degree and I had no respect

>>> for that

>>>>>>>>> professor. I do respect Dr. Gish.

>>>>>>>> On what basis? What part of his long and well-documented history

>>> of lies,

>>>>>>>> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect?

>>>>>>> It's a long story so I won't bore you. The bottom line that she

>>>>>>> rediculed

>>>>>>> several other Christians and myself.

>>>>>> What part of "What part of his long and well-documented history of

>>>>>> lies,

>>>>>> deception and dishonesty do you find worthy of respect?" did you seem

>>>>>> to

>>>>>> not comprehend?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> I.e. Kelsey wasn't asking why you didn't respect your professor but

>>>>>> was,

>>>>>> instead, asking why DO you respect Dr. Gish?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> (And you claim to have a masters degree? In what? Illiteracy?)

>>>>> I respect Dr. Gish because of his accomplishments.

>>>> Claims like this cause me not to respect you because you are so easily

>>>> gulled, but refuse to admit it.

>>>>

>>>>> I was present when he

>>>>> debated a science professor from the local state college. In my opinion,

>>>>> he won that debate.

>>>> You are wrong. Gish may have conned you, but he didn't win a debate.

>>> Unless you attended that same debate that I attended, how would you know.

>>

>> Because he knows Gish. Gish is a liar and a fraud. You can see that here:

>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cre-error.html

>>

>>>>> Those are two of the reasons that I respect him. I

>>>>> debated that same professor in his office the week before he debated Dr.

>>>>> Gish. He easily won the debate that he had with me. He probably believed

>>>>> that he could just as easily win the debate with Dr. Gish. However, Dr.

>>>>> Gish was an experienced debater and easily won the debate.

>>>> Gish lied. You bought his lies.

>> No comment Jason? We are asserting that Bullfrog Gish is a liar. We have

>> evidence to support that assertion. Yet you still respect him????

>

> Let's say that you lived in a different city than your father lived. You

> have a great deal of respect for your father. You meet someone that starts

> to tell you how evil your father is and that he had all sorts of evidence

> about your father.

>

> You would have two options:

> option 1: Agree agree that man and agree with the evidence.

> option 2: Continue to have respect for your father and disregard the evidence.

>

> I would choose option 2.

> option 2:

>

>

No, there is a third option, and that is to find out for yourself what

the truth is.

Guest Kelsey Bjarnason
Posted

[snips]

 

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:42:32 -0700, Jason wrote:

> I disagree. If a man has been making use of a wheel chair for 10 years and

> is healed and as a result no longer has to use a wheel chair

 

Then it shows he was healed and doesn't need a wheelchair. PERIOD .

 

You apparently cannot tell the difference between an event and evidence

of a claim.

 

Try again.

 

 

--

Reason kills Creationism dead!

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <8f0kj4-ofp.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

<kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:

> [snips]

>

> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 19:22:10 -0700, Jason wrote:

>

> > Thanks for your post. It's my opinion that time did exist prior to the Big

> > Bang.

>

> Okay, fine. On what do you base your opinion?

>

> Let's see. We measure time by events - oscillations of an atom, for

> example. We measure that by its interaction with, say, photons, which in

> turn interact with sensors. Except there are no sensors, no atoms. So

> what are we measuring?

>

> For that matter, while we might posit there were photons or some

> equivalent, we cannot state that the rules by which they operate here and

> now also apply, so we cannot even correctly say we could use those to

> perform measurements, even if there were something to measure.

>

> So on what do you base your opinion that time did exist "prior" to the BB?

> On what basis do you assert that "before the BB" is even a sensible

> statement?

 

Let's go about it a different way. Is it your opinion that time and

physics did not exist prior to the Big Bang?. Please explain your answer.

Perhaps you could convince me that I was wrong.

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <sjke63tantjqq2dpvsd7o5b9erjgcsu4m4@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

<lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:29:58 -0700, in alt.atheism

> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> <Jason-0606071829590001@66-52-22-48.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >In article <hfde63dca58omfcv2llpie6a31salkrif1@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> >

> >> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 21:32:07 -0700, in alt.atheism

> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> >> <Jason-0506072132080001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >> >In article <vq7c635rnq3na6a6isbetaim0eog4bjqs9@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> >> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> >>

> >> ...

> >>

> >> >> Not one of those are evidence related to any gods at all. You are the

> >> >> most stubbornly ignorant man I have ever had to deal with.

> >> >

> >> >

> >> >The sun God Shamash is mentioned in the law code of Hammurabi.

> >>

> >> Do you believe in the sun God Shamash because it was mentioned in the

> >> law code of Hammurabi?

> >

> >No--I was aswering a question--see the above two posts.

> >

> The fact that people worshipped gods is not evidence that the gods

> existed. Is this really confusing to you?

 

You missed my point.

Guest Martin Phipps
Posted

On Jun 7, 2:48 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181116070.776867.269...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > On Jun 6, 11:13 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>

> > > I googled "miracle healings" and found lots of sites. This was my favorit=

> > e:

>

> > > About & Contact this project

> > > en espanol

> > > Search =80 Miracles =80 Prayer =80 Power =80 Science =80 Home

> > > THE MIRACLE HEALING TESTIMONY

> > > OF WILLIAM A. KENT

> > > Giving all the Praise, Honor and Glory unto the Lord through whom this

> > > testimony is made possible this eleventh day of November 2000.

> > > Edited this 20th day of December to include the following quote from my

> > > Doctor, Dr. Dino Delaportas, MD

>

> > > "I rejoice in awe of you and the miracles the Lord has performed."

>

> > What "Lord"? God? Jesus? Neither of them ever existed.

> I would like for you to tell me how that young man was able to walk unless

> God had healed him? His doctor confirmed that he was healed.

 

And how are you able to walk, Jason, with that brain of yours? Why

doesn't your god cure you? It would be a lot less frustrating for the

rest of us if you were actually able to understand anything we tried

to explain to you.

 

Hint: if God exists then we should be perfect. We shouldn't have to

be healed. And don't give me Adam and Eve and the original sin: if

your god were to exist then either your god would be benevolent and

people wouldn't suffer or your god would be malevolent and would be

making people suffer.

 

Martin

Guest cactus
Posted

Jason wrote:

> In article <1181117377.544779.313320@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

>> On Jun 6, 12:11 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>>

>>> So if scientists arrive at a consensus that time did not exist prior to

>>> the Big Bang than people like yourself just accept it without question.

>> And if scientists actually refuse to say what happened before Planck

>> time then what does that tell you? (See

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time

>> )

>>

>> If we say "We don't know" then you say "Aha! You don't know!" but

>> when we tell you what we DO know you claim we don't have evidence and

>> are just pushing what we believe. Actually, Jason, that is what YOU

>> are doing, not us.

>>

>> Martin

>

> Martin,

> We are advocates of different theories. I realize that the advocates of

> evolution and the Big Bang theory believe they have all of the answers and

> all of the evidence.

 

You don't understand. They are theories, working hypotheses, that's all.

They are the best we have right now, but the instant that something

better comes along the new theories will be accepted and the old ones

tossed out.

 

However, if you removed your rose colored glasses,

> you would realize that you do not have all of the answers and all of the

> evidence.

 

Of course not. But the facts we have support evolution and the Big

Bang. The evidence is overwhelmingly in their favor. But produce some

valid evidence that refutes them, and they will be gone.

 

For example, you do not know how the mass of energy that

> expanded during the Big Bang came to be. You seem to believe that it just

> came about by chance. I believe God caused it to happen and even caused

> the mass of energy to expand.

 

That is your right. It could be.

 

Of course, a hundred years from now--there

> may be even better theories to explain how God was able to make it happen.

> I know that God caused it to happen but don't know exactly how he done it.

>

> jason

>

>

Guest Martin Phipps
Posted

On Jun 7, 2:57 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181118078.064710.322...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > On Jun 6, 12:21 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > In article <1181091605.694271.234...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > On Jun 6, 6:19 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>

> > > > > Scientists may have a consensus about this subject but I doubt that they

> > > > > have evidence that time did not exist prior to the Big Bang.

>

> > > > Except all the evidence supporting the second law of thermodynamics.

>

> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

>

> > > Interesting point. Is it your opinion that all of the energy in the

> > > universe was in the mass of energy that expanded during the Big Bang? Is

> > > it possible that there was some energy that was outside (or not part of)

> > > the mass of energy that expanded during the Big Bang?

>

> > No, not according to inflationary theory.

> > (Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_spaceand

> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflationary_theory)

>

> > > If there was some energy that was not part of the mass of energy that

> > > expanded--would that mean that physics and time did exist prior to the Big

> > > Bang?

>

> > It would require inflationary theory to be wrong but that would still

> > leave other support for big bang theory: inflationary theory was

> > proposed as a theory to explain the big bang. In any case, the

> > density of the universe is found to agree exactly with the predictions

> > of inflationary theory.

>

> > I think you're missing the bigger point here. You have 5.39121 x

> > 10^-44 seconds to play with. Perhaps you want to argue that God

> > existed for that briefest period of time and then promptly disappeared

> > once everything got started. No physicist would care to disagree

> > because physics would have nothing to say about that period of time

> > and it wouldn't change the fact that no gods exist in the universe we

> > see today.

> I have stated in other posts that neither myself or other advocates of

> creation research know how God

 

You god doesn't exist. YOU proved that, remember? People from

various caultures believed in various imaginary gods and your god is

one of them.

 

Martin

Guest Martin Phipps
Posted

On Jun 7, 3:09 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <f468ua$k2...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

> > Jason wrote:

> > > In article <f43nh2$ve...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike

> > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote:

>

> > >> Jason wrote:

> > >>> In article <a829i.22312$KC4.2...@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

> > >>> <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

> > >>>> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message

> > >>>>> That is true. I was wanting to go even further back into the history of

> > >>>>> the solar system than the Big Bang. I want to know how the mass of

> energy

> > >>>>> (that expanded during the Big Bang) came to be.

> > >>>>> If you don't know the answer--just tell me. Several people are trying

> > >>>>> there best to find reasons to avoid answering this question. One person

> > >>>>> was honest enough to say that he did not know the answer.

> > >>>>> Jason

> > >>>> Uhh...Jason, what is your definition of the solar system?

> > >>> source: Webster's Dictionary:

> > >>> solar system--the sun together with the group of celestial bodies that are

> > >>> held together by its attraction and revolve around it; also a similar

> > >>> system centered on another star.

> > >> Ok, so you can quote a dictionary. Now use that to understand how

> > >> meaningless "go even further back into the history of the solar system

> > >> than the Big Bang" is.

>

> > >> The big bang was NOT part of the history of the solar system since the

> > >> big bang happened 13 billion years ago (approx) and the solar system

> > >> formed 4.5-5 billion years ago (approx.)

>

> > >> Also, if you knew anything about the big bang, you'd know there was no

> > >> "further back" than it since time itself started at the big bang.

>

> > > Do you have evidence that "time started at the big bang"?

>

> > Yes. Read a book on cosmology or thermodynamics.

>

> > >>> Are you trying to avoid answering my question: the question is

> > >>> How did the mass of energy that expanded during the Big Bang come to be?

> > >> We don't know. But if you claim that it came to be because of god then

> > >> "How did god come to be?"

>

> > > I don't know how God came to be.

>

> > Then how do you know that god DID come to be?

>

> I see the evidence when I look at the stars in the sky or visit a state park.

 

That's evidence that stars exist and not that your god exists. Your

god does not, in fact, exist. You proved that yourself with your list

of ancient artifacts. Thank you for proving god doesn't exist. Now

we can all get on with our lives.

 

Martin

Guest Martin Phipps
Posted

On Jun 7, 3:14 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181116197.466834.209...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

>

>

>

>

> <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > On Jun 6, 11:24 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > In article <1181089429.327200.94...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

> > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > On Jun 6, 3:32 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>

> > > > > Written evidence (contracts, wills) are used in courts on a daily basis.

>

> > > > And written "evidence" that has not been authenticated or witnessed is

> > > > dismissed as fraudulent. Every day.

>

> > > Some archeologists and paleontologists are experts in regard to written

> > > evidence related to ancient civiliizations.

>

> > And these experts are not on your side.

>

> > Seehttp://www.jesusneverexisted.com/lying.htm

> NO

 

Do you have any evidence for this assertion?

> However, there is a section in the back of my study Bible entitled,

> "Archeology Discoveries". I was told (and I don't have the evidence) that

> most (or all) colleges that offer degrees in Archeology--require

> archeology students to take at least one course related to Bible History.

> They mainly concentrate on the portions of the Old Testament related to

> ancient cities.

 

Apparently not.

 

Hint: the fact that ancient cities described in the Bible exist does

not mean your god exists. The cities of Troy, Sparta and Athens all

existed. Does that mean Zeus, Appolo and Athena exist?

 

Martin

Guest Martin Phipps
Posted

On Jun 7, 3:16 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <ldy9i.18909$px2.15...@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph"

> <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message

> >news:Jason-0506072132080001@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > > In article <vq7c635rnq3na6a6isbetaim0eog4bj...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>

> > >> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 20:30:35 -0700, in alt.atheism

> > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> > >> <Jason-0506072030360...@66-52-22-51.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> > >> >In article <fqrb6319gmon3uuupb9cgivpkqjifod...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> > >> ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>

> > >> >> On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 15:30:21 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

> > >> >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> > >> >> <Jason-0506071530220...@66-52-22-97.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> > >> >> >In article <f44fi1$iso$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

> > >> >> ><tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote:

>

> > >> >> >> Jason wrote:

> > >> >> >> > In article <012b63tujucr4kb7leki9b6pspv2djo...@4ax.com>, Don

> > >> >> >> > Kresch

> > >> >> >> > <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote:

>

> > >> >> >> >> In alt.atheism On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 23:08:34 -0700,

> > >> >> >> >> J...@nospam.com

> > >> >> >> >> (Jason) let us all know that:

>

> > >> >> >> >>> In article <2ra963tlfdpeerookdfam9m6d3hpmv3...@4ax.com>, Free

> > >> >> >> >>> Lunch

> > >> >> >> >>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>

> > >> >> >> >>>> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:11:55 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

> > >> >> >> >>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> > >> >> >> >>>> <Jason-0406071611550...@66-52-22-21.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> > >> >> >> >>>>> In article <o009631ka9guj2ruo1ipj7kance10h9...@4ax.com>,

> > >> >> >> >>>>> Jim07D7

> > >> >> >> >>>>> <Jim0...@nospam.net> wrote:

>

> > >> >> >> >>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) said:

>

> > >> >> >> >>>>>>> I

> > >> >> >> >>>>>>> know how the advocates of creation science explain how life

> > >> >> >> >>>>>>> came

> > >> >> >to be

> > >> >> >> >>>>>> Could you summarize their explanation?

> > >> >> >> >>>>> God created the solar system. God created mankind; some

> > > plants; some

> > >> >> >> >>>>> animals. After the creation process was finished, evolution

> > >> >took over. I

> > >> >> >> >>>>> am not an expert on Darwin but have been told that his theory

> > >> >was mainly

> > >> >> >> >>>>> related to how plants and animals are able to change (mainly

> > >> >> >> >>>>> as

> > >> >a result

> > >> >> >> >>>>> of mutations). I accept those aspects of evolution theory. I

> > >> >> >> >>>>> don't

> > >> >> >accept

> > >> >> >> >>>>> the aspects of evolution theory related to common descent and

> > >> >> >abiogenesis.

> > >> >> >> >>>>> See my detailed post to Jim for a more detailed response.

>

> > >> >> >> >>>> Yet you have not a shred of evidence to support your

> > >> >> >> >>>> supposition.

>

> > >> >> >> >>>> Learn.

> > >> >> >> >>> Fossil evidence and evidence from various legends that have

> > > been passed

> > >> >> >> >>> down from generation to generation. I provided Jim with a long

> > > list of

> > >> >> >> >>> written evidence that has been passed down from ancient

> > > civilizations.

> > >> >> >> >>> Those records mention God or Gods. Even some American Indian

> > > tribes had

> > >> >> >> >>> legends that were passed down from generation to generation

> > >> >> >> >>> about

> > >> >God or

> > >> >> >> >>> Gods.

> > >> >> >> >> That's still not evidence. I don't think you understand

> > >> >> >> >> the

> > >> >> >> >> concept of "evidence".

>

> > >> >> >> > Written evidence (contracts, wills) are used in courts on a

> > > daily basis.

> > >> >> >> > Historians and Archeologists use written evidence such as

> > > infomation that

> > >> >> >> > was written on cave walls.

>

> > >> >> >> Written evidence such as contracts and wills are useless if not

> > >> >> >> signed.

> > >> >> >> The the translation of copy of a copy of a copy of a translation

> > >> >> >> would

> > >> >> >> hardly stand up in court.

>

> > >> >> >> Historians hardly ever use one source.

>

> > >> >> >> And what do the archaeologists prove by their writings on cave

> > >> >> >> walls?

> > >> >> >> Correct. Someone painted nice little pictures on walls.

>

> > >> >> >> Ok, you can have that. Someone wrote your book. What else do you

> > > want to

> > >> >> >> prove with it? What that book says? From one source? Are you nuts?

>

> > >> >> >> Tokay

>

> > >> >> >This is the sort of written evidence that I had in mind:

>

> > >> >> >The law code of Hammurabi

> > >> >> >the Genzer calendar

> > >> >> >the elephantine papyri

> > >> >> >the hittite monuments

> > >> >> >religious texts from Ras Shamra--ancient Ugarit

> > >> >> >Ugaritic Inscriptions

> > >> >> >Nuzi Tablets

> > >> >> >The Mari Letters

>

> > >> >> None are related to any physical science.

>

> > >> >The point was related to evidence related to God. If there is evidence

> > >> >from many different ancient civilizations that those people believed in

> > >> >God or Gods--that is evidence that God created life on this planet and

> > >> >the

> > >> >information was passed from generation to generation. Bible scholars are

> > >> >experts related to that evidence.

>

> > >> Not one of those are evidence related to any gods at all. You are the

> > >> most stubbornly ignorant man I have ever had to deal with.

>

> > > The sun God Shamash is mentioned in the law code of Hammurabi.

>

> > Do you worship Shamash?

>

> You missed the point.

 

1) You never made a point.

 

2) You never answered his question.

 

Martin

Guest Kelsey Bjarnason
Posted

[snips]

 

On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 22:45:32 -0700, Jason wrote:

> You (and others) have told me that evolution applies only to living

> organisms.

 

Correct, because that is what it does apply to.

> I don't blame other people and yourself for not wanting to

> discuss the time in history when there were NO living organisms on this

> planet.

 

Wrong; we're perfectly happy to discuss it. What we are not prepared to

do is discuss it in the context of evolution , as that would be a

fallacy, since evolution does not cover that situation.

 

There may also be limits on what we'll discuss because those are not

preferred fields of study for us. Take abiogenesis; I know a little about

it, but not very much, as I have never seriously studied it; it lies

completely outside the areas of science which interest me, such as

evolution.

 

Others might be the other way around; fascinated by abiogenesis, yet

almost wholly ignorant of evolution; why would they study a field wholly

unrelated to the one they're interested in?

> The reason is because you have no evidence that indicates that

> life evolved from non-life.

 

No, the reason is that you persist in examining topics such as abiogenesis

in the context of evolution . Since evolution does not deal with

origins, we are not willing to assist you in your continued attempts to

confuse matters by pretending they're the same thing, or even related.

 

You're concluding - by way of analogy - that we don't wish to discuss math

because we refuse to discuss it in the middle of a conversation about

music. This is false; we may be perfectly happy to discuss maths... just

not in this context . It provides too much distraction, too many areas

for misunderstanding. Nor is it relevant , so why bring it up when we're

supposedly discussing a completely different subject?

 

> Someone told me that life may have evolved

> from amino acids. A scientist could easily conduct an experiment to

> determine whether or not life could evolve from amino acids.

 

Fine; take it up with them. They would be in the abiogensis department.

Virtually all the discussions here are predominantly about evolution,

which is a completely different subject.

 

> I have seen

> no evidence to indicate that a scientist has proved that life has

> evolved from amino acids.

 

No, but then you've also shown your knowledge of significant aspects of

science is a good century out of date, so your knowledge of such things

is hardly relevant to anything.

> Unless you can prove that life can evolve from

> non-life, do not expect the advocates of creation science to accept all

> aspects of the theory of evolution.

 

Again, you promote the lie that the origins of life and evolution are in

any way related. Are you simply too stupid to figure out the difference,

or are you actually so dishonest that you know the difference and choose

to lie about it?

 

 

--

Ouvrir de l’autre bout

Guest Martin Phipps
Posted

On Jun 7, 3:26 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181116515.297390.257...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,

> hhyaps...@gmail.com wrote:

> > Hey, Jason,

> > Do you know that during the Crusade, Christians killed all the non-

> > believers. This was one of the worst atrocity committed by religion.

> > Do you wish to give it a thought when you talk about crimes!

>

> > And you know Bush made up stories about WMD to invade Iraq, don't you?

> > And he claimed to be born-again or a religious Christian?

> > Yap

>

> There has been a lot of historical revisionism in relation to the

> Crusades. The Muslims took over Spain and were making effords to take over

> some of the other European countries. The Crusades were an effort to drive

> the Muslims out of Europe and reduce the total number of Muslims so they

> would not be able to return to Spain and take it over again. The

> Historical Revisionists leave out the murders that were done by the

> Muslims during that time period. They portray the Muslims as innocent

> victims.

 

He wasn't talking about the muslims.

>From http://straitway.org/2001/03012001.htm :

 

Church History

"Kill Them All, Let God Sort Them Out!"

 

This saying, actually used in some circles today and historically in

military situations, got its beginning during the terrible persecution

that Christians suffered in 13th Century Europe. The freedoms we enjoy

could not be imagined in that world over seven hundred years ago. It

is important for us today, to know the hard-hearted mindset of those

who opposed the Truth fueled by the evil machinations of a

Machiavellian-style papacy in Rome.

 

The policy set by Rome at that time is still in force doctrinally.

This is known as "Nulla salus extra ecclesium" ("Outside the Church

there is no salvation.") It was "open season" on those who taught any

doctrine other than that which the Pope allowed and this made such

people enemies of the Catholic Church.

 

In 1210 AD, Pope Innocent III unleashed "orders of fire and sword"

against a group of heretics throughout Europe, mostly remembered as

Cathars. Of special note, at the great city of Beziers, France there

was a terrible massacre of heretics. Though the actual count will

never be known, it is thought that perhaps 100,000 people were

ultimately slaughtered. The papal forces besieged Beziers and all

inside were commanded to surrender and repent. The heretics inside,

also known as Waldensians or Albigensians, were believers in a

widespread form of gnosticism which threatened the greedy and

materialistic goals of the Papacy.

 

According to a Catholic source, "Caesarius of Heisterbach: Medieval

Heresies," after the city was taken, at a cost in life of thousands of

defenders, about 450 heretics were "examined" by the inquisitors and

many of them claimed to be Christians rather than being heretics and

would not repent. Others claimed to be good Catholics and did not want

to die. Fearing the possibility that these were lying, must have

caused the infamous phrase to first be uttered. In Latin, "Neca eos

omnes. Deus suos agnoset" or "Kill them all. God will know His own."

This was a misunderstood reference to 2 Tim. 2:19 which in part reads,

"The Lord knoweth them that are his" (KJV). About fifty were hanged,

the rest were burned to death. At this time, most Catholics felt that

life on earth was simply a brief interlude to prepare for the

hereafter. If one led a godly life, God would know of it, and the

reward would be eternal paradise. So, this statement made perfect

sense according to the concepts of Catholic righteousness. If every

single soul in Beziers were killed, the good would go to Heaven and

the evil would go to Hell, and so the papal killers were doing God's

work. The New Testament says, John 5:22, "For the Father judges no

one, but has committed all judgment to the Son," (NKJ) And, obviously,

man is not to murder (Luke 18:20; James 2:11).

 

Were there New Testament Christians in Beziers? The Cathars were truly

heretics, but we also can see from the testimonies the Catholic

examiners themselves left behind, there could have been a good many

true Christians among them. At this time in history and for centuries

before this there were many regions of Europe that had been benign

homes for the faithful. Though always a serious persecutor of the

faithful, the Catholic Church truly became the main exterminator of

Christians when it became militarily powerful beginning in the 12th

Century.

 

Shouldn't we be thankful we are so blessed to live in the times we do!

"Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors..." (Rom. 8:37;

read verses 35-39). - Marc Smith

 

Martin

Guest Kelsey Bjarnason
Posted

[snips]

 

On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 22:25:01 -0700, Jason wrote:

> The Scopes Monkey Trial was held in 1925. A high school teacher named John

> Scopes was on trial for teaching the theory of evolution in violation of

> Tennessee State law. It is now 2007 and the roles of the evolutionists and

> Christians have been reversed. The evolutionists will not allow the

> teaching of intelligent design.

 

They won't allow it being taught as science ... because it isn't

science.

 

If you want to set up an elective course and paint big banners above the

door saying "This way to the completely unfounded religious nonsense

course", I'm sure nobody would complain overmuch.

> The evolutionists even have liberal

> judges on their side. The only children in America that can learn about

> both the theory of evolution and the theory of intelligent design are

> the children that attend Christian schools.

 

There is no theory of intelligent design. Disagree? Fine... trot it

out. An actual, valid, proper scientific theory, complete with

falsifiable predictions, tests done to attempt to prove it wrong, and the

resultant data.

 

 

 

--

Personally, I vote that there be fines and arrests for consenting

adults if they are not married--heterosexual or otherwise. - Mark Fox

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...