Guest Don Kresch Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 In alt.atheism On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:36:31 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) let us all know that: >In article <v88t63pod2hnvrp1qs37joi09ogmqo4ner@4ax.com>, Don Kresch ><ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: > >> In alt.atheism On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:24:17 -0700, Jason@nospam.com >> (Jason) let us all know that: >> >> >In article <omsr63lbc8asb8qs5gghasksvaqesjamfi@4ax.com>, Don Kresch >> ><ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >> > >> >> In alt.atheism On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 08:23:39 -0700, gudloos@yahoo.com >> >> let us all know that: >> >> >> >> >On 11 Jun., 15:38, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >> >> >> In alt.atheism On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:28:00 -0700, J...@nospam.com >> >> >> (Jason) let us all know that: >> >> >> >> >> >> >12 percent agree with you related to one aspect of evolution theory. >> >> >> >88 percent agree with me related to that same aspect of >evolution theory. >> >> >> >> >> >> Wrong. >> >> >> >> >> >> Now then: what about my responses to the 20 questions? I'll >> >> >> keep asking until you give me something more substantive than "thank >> >> >> you for answering". >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >How many years do you intend to dedicate? >> >> >> >> Until he gives up and leaves. >> >> >> >> >You want to try again. >> >> >> You want to actually respond to my answers? Or do you want to >> continue to be a coward? >> >Upon your request, we will try again Ok--respond to my answers. That's how we "try again". Don --- aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" Quote
Guest Hannele Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 Op Tue, 12 Jun 2007 22:03:44 +0200 schreef Jason <Jason@nospam.com>: > In article <Xns994D94878C66Ffreddybear@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone > <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote: > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> news:Jason-1206071222580001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: >> >>> In article <5d83hcF31q6f3U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" >>> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >>> >>>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >>>> news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >>>>> In article <1181649884.050718.194220@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >>>>> Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>> In article >>>>>>> <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>> Martin >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>>> God >>>>>>> >>>>>>> God doesn't exist. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> created mankind, he >>>>>>>>> gave us free will. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Free will doesn't exist. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You're 0 for 2. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands free >>>>>>> will, many Bible doctrines and even issues related to life; >>>>>>> sociological and psychological issues--make sense. For example, >>>>>>> I now understand why some >>>>>>> people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a month >>>>>>> each year in >>>>>>> third world countries. I also understand why some people do >>>>>>> terrible things such as becoming murderers or rapists. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing ten >>>>>> people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about the men who >>>>>> killed 3000 people on September 11th because they believed in >>>>>> their god? >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin >>>>> >>>>> Martin, >>>>> Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. >>>>> They may believe or think that their actions are pleasing to >>>>> God--but they are wrong. You can find many cases in history where >>>>> people done terrible things that they believed were pleasing to >>>>> God--but were not pleasing to God. >>>>> Jason >>>> >>>> Who are you to judge? >>> >>> It's easy to judge the actions of the men that killed 3000 people on >>> 9/11. >>> >> >> It's easy to find people who will tell us what a blasphemous infidel you >> are for saying that the 9/11 Jihadists were not pleasing Allah with >> their actions. > > You already know that millions of people in America agree that the > actions > of those men were not pleasing to Jehovah. But I bet Voldemort was pleased! -- Hannele aa #2221 Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:23:22 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-1206071023220001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1181649738.152697.71080@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin ><phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 1:10 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <1181613813.848759.320...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > > On Jun 12, 8:55 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > In article ><1181601575.339680.162...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> > >> > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > > > > On Jun 11, 2:07 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> > > > > > Cheryl Prewitt could provide a mountain of physical evidence and >> > you still >> > > > > > would not believe that God healed her. >> > >> > > > > Presumably. But she didn't. It's called "preaching to the choir". >> > > > > If there was really some cover up to hide the evidence that she had >> > > > > been cured then surely she would have called for an investigation by >> > > > > now. In the meantime, all we have is the word of a Godbot. And that >> > > > > is worth the same as a bucket of shit. You prove that lately with >> > > > > every other post you make here. >> > >> > > > Dr. Gish, Dr. Morris and Cheryl Prewitt are preaching to the choir. >> > >> > > It's a sign of progress that you can recognize this. >> > >> > > > She >> > > > does not need to carry her medial records and X rays with her when she >> > > > gives her testimony. We believed her when she gave her testimony and >> > > > enjoyed hearing her sing various songs. Perhaps she does carry the >medical >> > > > records with her in case she speaks to a group that includes >skeptics but >> > > > I doubt that she speaks to such groups of people. >> > >> > > No, of course not. Which is precisely why rational people would not >> > > believe her. Why wouldn't she want to convince people who don't >> > > believe? We _are_ calling her a liar, after all. >> > >> > > > She would not enjoy >> > > > giving her testimony to people that took turns calling her a liar. >> > >> > > Tough. That's what people do in science. Scientists do not accept >> > > anything without evidence. That's just the way it is. My high school >> > > math teacher, for one, would be terribly offended by your willingness >> > > to believe what people say without evidence, let alone proof. You >> > > Godbots don't seem to be willing to accept that, let alone be able to >> > > deal with it. >> >> > If I provided physical evidence that indicates that her leg bone grew 2 >> > inches, would you believe that God healed her leg? >> >> How can I believe in the existnace of something that you yourself have >> demonstrated not top exist? Do you also believe in Zeus, Allah and >> Amun Ra? >> >> Martin > >Martin, >Is your answer yes or no? If your answer is no, why should I waste time >trying to find out if any physical evidence re: Cheryl is mentioned on the >web? > You need to provide physical evidence that the healing had something to do with God. If you can do so, I would believe you. Until then, I have no reason to believe your claim. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:24:29 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-1206071024300001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <5d7uaoF331s2lU2@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" ><witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in >> >> snip >> > >> > Martin, >> > If I provided physical evidence that indicates that her leg bone grew 2 >> > inches, would you believe that God healed her leg? >> > Jason >> >> Of course not. Most importantly, you'd have to prove that your god exists >> and does anything. > >That's the reason that I did not try to find the information on the web. > Because you know that you cannot provide any evidence that your God exists. Despite that, you reject actual evidence. Why? Who taught you to be so dishonest? Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:30:51 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-1206071030510001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1181644398.763698.134870@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > >> On 12 Jun., 02:37, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: .... >> > Insurance companies blame God for all natural disasters. Perhaps there >> > reasoning is that God is responsible since those natural disasters would >> > not have happened if God had not created the world. >> >> Gosh, do you think that might be it? > >One of the positive things about it is the insurance companies (unlike >yourself) are acknowledging that God created the earth. > No, Jason, that is not true. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:36:31 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-1206071136310001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <v88t63pod2hnvrp1qs37joi09ogmqo4ner@4ax.com>, Don Kresch ><ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: > >> In alt.atheism On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:24:17 -0700, Jason@nospam.com >> (Jason) let us all know that: >> >> >In article <omsr63lbc8asb8qs5gghasksvaqesjamfi@4ax.com>, Don Kresch >> ><ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >> > >> >> In alt.atheism On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 08:23:39 -0700, gudloos@yahoo.com >> >> let us all know that: >> >> >> >> >On 11 Jun., 15:38, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >> >> >> In alt.atheism On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:28:00 -0700, J...@nospam.com >> >> >> (Jason) let us all know that: >> >> >> >> >> >> >12 percent agree with you related to one aspect of evolution theory. >> >> >> >88 percent agree with me related to that same aspect of >evolution theory. >> >> >> >> >> >> Wrong. >> >> >> >> >> >> Now then: what about my responses to the 20 questions? I'll >> >> >> keep asking until you give me something more substantive than "thank >> >> >> you for answering". >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >How many years do you intend to dedicate? >> >> >> >> Until he gives up and leaves. >> >> >> >> >You want to try again. >> >> >> You want to actually respond to my answers? Or do you want to >> continue to be a coward? >> >> >> Don >> --- >> aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde >> Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. >> >> "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" >> Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" > >Upon your request, we will try again--do you want me to post 10 more questions? > Are you actually interested in the answers, or will it be like the rest of your questions, an attempt to deflect from the fact that you believe a bunch of religious lies and refuse to look at physical evidence? Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1206071614120001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <GkEbi.5712$K8.1225@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-1206071501420001@66-52-22-111.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <opc3k4-7or.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >> > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> [snips] >> >> >> >> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:42:26 -0700, Jason wrote: >> >> >> >> > Yes, that is true. If I provided physical evidence which indicated >> >> > that >> >> > her leg bone grew 2 inches--how would you explain how it happened? >> >> >> >> Honestly, by stating the cause - if any, you haven't validated even >> >> this >> >> much yet - simply isn't known yet. >> >> >> >> "I don't know" is not the same as "Yes, there really is a super being >> >> who, >> >> of all the thousands of such beings described, just happens to match >> >> this >> >> particular one and he really does heal people, but does it magically >> >> without leaving any evidence he did it - or even that he exists." >> >> >> >> You see how those differ? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in. >> > >> > Have you considered that God is giving you evidence that he exists by >> > healing people? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in. >> >> If he is he needs to advertise. Why is it that "god" is always so >> secretive? >> His 'inerrant' word is full of errors and nonsense. His works are always >> done by man. That's right, god can't do anything for himself. Almost like >> man invented him, isn't it. Have you considered that, Jason? > > The healings that I mentioned were done by God and not by man. God may be > secretive to you but not to everyone. We see evidence of his power on a > regular basis. When I seen the Grand Canyon, I could see the evidence of > his power. > jason Actually you see the power of the Colorado river and its tributaries. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1206071655030001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <mb8u63pc8tjpo22m7t75i54t0e8j7oh1cr@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:30:51 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> <Jason-1206071030510001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >> >In article <1181644398.763698.134870@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> >gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >> > >> >> On 12 Jun., 02:37, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> ... >> >> >> > Insurance companies blame God for all natural disasters. Perhaps >> >> > there >> >> > reasoning is that God is responsible since those natural disasters >> >> > would >> >> > not have happened if God had not created the world. >> >> >> >> Gosh, do you think that might be it? >> > >> >One of the positive things about it is the insurance companies (unlike >> >yourself) are acknowledging that God created the earth. >> > >> No, Jason, that is not true. > > I was told that at least one insurance company no longer uses the term > "acts of God". Even if all insurance companies used the phrase, it is still not an acknowledgement of the existence of god. Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1206071637480001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1181683568.769547.221730@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > bramble <leopoldo.perdomo@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 12 jun, 15:20, gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >> > On 12 Jun., 08:12, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> >> > > > But the parents are not responsible for the behavior of an adult >> > > > competent child. They may regret have given birth to that child, >> > > > but >> > > > they are not legally responsible for his actions after attaining >> > > > majority. They may have raised him in a way that led him to commit >> > > > his >> > > > crimes, but that is a psychological issue rather than a legal one. >> > > > It >> > > > might be a moral issue, depending on how they raised him. >> > >> > > > > Jason >> > >> > > cactus, >> > > My point was that God is like the parents. >> > >> > What utter nonsense! The parents are not all-powerful. They cannot >> > possibly be responsible for everything the child does. >> > >> > In much the same way the >> > >> > > parents were indirectly responsible for the murder since the murder >> > > would >> > > not have happened if the son had never been born--God is indirectly >> > > responsible for evil, since evil would never have happened if God had >> > > not >> > > created the solar system and life. >> > >> > Your analogy is transparently invalid. >> >> If parents would had the ability to change for the better the behavior >> of his son, he would surely do it. We want that he would be free, but >> free to drive a reasonable life. We, as parents, do no want our kids >> to fall into a pool of shit. >> But, sometimes, we are too busy or we are not enough vlever, and our >> kids began to show bad a attitude, and we do not know how to change or >> reverse this. >> If we were like gods, our kids would have freedom to behave in a nice >> manner and to keep out of trouble. But we are not gods. >> So, go is a very bad parent. And this analogy posited by Jason is not >> valid. >> If there is a god, he would surely change all that. And this is one >> of the proves that there is not any god. >> Bramble > > God could have created robots that were programmed by God to do only kind > and wonderful things and never do bad things such as murder. Instead of > creating programmed robots, God created people that had free will. People > will eventually be judged by God in relation to how they used their free > will. Did they love God or turn their backs on God? Did they violate God's > commandments or follow the commandments? Did they love or hate? Did they > do good or evil? etc. > Jason Or god could have just not created man. Why did god chose this moment in eternity to create life? Was he lonely? God worshippers should use a little reason when thinking of their god. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:07:52 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-1206071207530001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > >> > You want to try again. I'll find 10 or 20 more questions for you.- Skjul = >> tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >> >> Yes, we all know that you are not capable of being embarrassed by your >> dishonesty. It is odd that you are proud of it though. > > >Questions for Evolutionists > >BlueBar > > > 1. Where did the space for the universe come from? That question shows a profound lack of understanding of cosmological origins. > 2. Where did matter come from? It's a form of energy and is a result of the Big Bang. > 3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)? Like the first question, the question betrays be a misunderstanding of physics so deep that it would be impossible to clarify it. > 4. How did matter get so perfectly organized? You assume a fact not in evidence. Where did you get the idea that matter is (perfectly) organized. > 5. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing? Like the first question, the question betrays be a misunderstanding of physics so deep that it would be impossible to clarify it. Energy and matter are the same. > 6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter? 3.5 to 4 billion years ago on earth, almost certainly on other planets as well. It happened because it was a natural result of the environment in which the chemical reactions were taking place. We don't know the details how, yet, but we know there are a number of valid possible paths. The matter wasn't dead. > 7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself? Learn? What a strange characterization. Life never learned to reproduce itself, it happened as a result of biochemical reactions. > 8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce? You are also misinformed about sexual reproduction. For what it's worth, there are still a huge number of organisms that swap genetic material even though they don't really reproduce sexually and there are a fair number of complex organisms that can reproduce sexually or not. > 9. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind >since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of >survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? >How do you explain this?) It's how life works. Don't try to impute motive when there is none. > 10. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any >new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce >Chinese books.) Mutations are not recombining of the genetic code. Once again, you ask a defective question. > 11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different >animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor? If there were any evidence that there were a creator, common descent would not be in conflict with that idea, but there is no evidence for a creator so the question is meaningless. > 12. Natural selection only works with the genetic information >available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain >the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if >evolution were true? Your misunderstanding of genetics. First, the complexity of the observed chromosomes of any organism is not particularly correlated with the apparent complexity of the organism itself. Second, almost all organisms have huge amounts of noncoding strands of DNA which can be used by other organisms. Third, viruses have found there way into chromosomes and remained there. > 13. When, where, why, and how did: a) Single-celled plants become >multicelled? (Where are the two- and threecelled intermediates?) There are many such forms of simple associated cell organisms: cell-colonies and diplococcus are two such examples. >b) Single-celled animals evolve? Please tell us what you mean by a single-celled animal. >c) Fish change to amphibians? d) Amphibians >change to reptiles? e) Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, >reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are >all very different!) How did the intermediate forms live? <http://evolution.berkeley.edu/> is easy enough to understand for someone who wants to learn. > 14. When, where, why, how, and from what did: a) Whales evolve? b) Sea >horses evolve? c) Bats evolve? d) Eyes evolve? e) Ears evolve? f) Hair, >skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve? <http://evolution.berkeley.edu/> is easy enough to understand for someone who wants to learn. > 15. Which evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the >others)? a) The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, >the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-1206071629120001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <Xns994DB060B8F89freddybear@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone > <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote: > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> news:Jason-1206071303440001@66-52-22-41.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: >> >> > In article <Xns994D94878C66Ffreddybear@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone >> > <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> >> news:Jason-1206071222580001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: >> >> >> >> > In article <5d83hcF31q6f3U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" >> >> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> >> news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> >> > In article >> >> >> > <1181649884.050718.194220@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >> >> >> > Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> >> > In article >> >> >> >> > <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >> >> >> >> > Martin >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > > On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> >> > > > God >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > > God doesn't exist. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > > created mankind, he >> >> >> >> > > > gave us free will. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > > Free will doesn't exist. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > > You're 0 for 2. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands >> >> >> >> > free will, many Bible doctrines and even issues related to >> >> >> >> > life; sociological and psychological issues--make sense. For >> >> >> >> > example, I now understand why some >> >> >> >> > people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a month >> >> >> >> > each year in >> >> >> >> > third world countries. I also understand why some people do >> >> >> >> > terrible things such as becoming murderers or rapists. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing >> >> >> >> ten people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about the >> >> >> >> men who killed 3000 people on September 11th because they >> >> >> >> believed in their god? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Martin, >> >> >> > Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. >> >> >> > They may believe or think that their actions are pleasing to >> >> >> > God--but they are wrong. You can find many cases in history >> >> >> > where people done terrible things that they believed were >> >> >> > pleasing to God--but were not pleasing to God. >> >> >> > Jason >> >> >> >> >> >> Who are you to judge? >> >> > >> >> > It's easy to judge the actions of the men that killed 3000 people >> >> > on 9/11. >> >> > >> >> >> >> It's easy to find people who will tell us what a blasphemous infidel >> >> you are for saying that the 9/11 Jihadists were not pleasing Allah >> >> with their actions. >> > >> > You already know that millions of people in America agree that the >> > actions of those men were not pleasing to Jehovah. >> > >> >> Is your religion a popularity contest? > No--what is your opinion about those men that killed 3000 people on 9/11? They thought they were being true to their god. What is your opinion? Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:36:36 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-1206071036370001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1181650169.856170.34150@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin ><phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 12, 6:00 pm, gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >> > On 11 Jun., 19:44, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:> In article ><1181574735.623825.62...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, >> > >> > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: >> > > > On 11 Jun., 05:47, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > > > > In article ><1181528064.340925.207...@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >> > >> > snip >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > Martin, >> > > > > I have a question for you. Has an experiment like this been done: >> > >> > > > > The scientists place bacteria (and nothing else) on a lab table. >They can >> > > > > mix any elements or combinations of elements with the bacteria. >They can >> > > > > mix amino acids with the bacteria. >> > > > > I mentioned the above items since they were probably present >before life >> > > > > forms were on this earth. >> > >> > > > > Have the scientists done an experiment like the one mentioned >above? If >> > > > > so, was the result: bacteria that evolved into an: >> > >> > > > > Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual reproduction). >> > >> > > > > If so, refer me to a website that mentions the experiment. >> > >> > > > > I may ask a biology professor at the local state college this >same questi= >> > > > on.- Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >> > >> > > > > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >> > >> > > > I hope you do. No doubt he/she could use a laugh. >> > >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> > >> > > These are two of the steps in the evolution of mankind: >> > >> > > STEP 1 Single cell (example: bacteria) >> > > STEP 2 Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual >reproduction). >> > >> > > Is this speculation or is it evidence? >> > >> > It is your childish misrepresentation of evolution, and, since you >> > have been told many times now, it is a very tedious lie. >> >> As cactus has already pointed out, as bacteria is alive it is correct >> to talk about the (biological) evolution of bacteria into animal >> cells. The ameoba is a single celled animal, for example. >> >> Martin > >Have any experiments been done that has indicated that it is possible for >a single cell (bacteria) can be induced to evolve into a single animal >cell (with DNA nucleus cabable of sexual reproduction)? > >If possible, provide a yes or no answer. > Your question betrays a profound ignorance. It's a foolish question. Why don't you spend some time learning why your question is meaningless instead of just repeating it. You hate God. That is the only possible explanation for your behavior here. Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote snip > > I do not reject all evidence. You reject evidence (testimony) that > Cheryl's leg bone grew 2 inches. Listen, I'm not sayin' the broad's leg didn't grow two inches. Maybe it did - though I honestly couldn't care less. However, there's NO evidence whatsoever that this leg-growing was caused by a god. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 In article <GkEbi.5712$K8.1225@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-1206071501420001@66-52-22-111.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <opc3k4-7or.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> [snips] > >> > >> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:42:26 -0700, Jason wrote: > >> > >> > Yes, that is true. If I provided physical evidence which indicated that > >> > her leg bone grew 2 inches--how would you explain how it happened? > >> > >> Honestly, by stating the cause - if any, you haven't validated even > >> this > >> much yet - simply isn't known yet. > >> > >> "I don't know" is not the same as "Yes, there really is a super being > >> who, > >> of all the thousands of such beings described, just happens to match this > >> particular one and he really does heal people, but does it magically > >> without leaving any evidence he did it - or even that he exists." > >> > >> You see how those differ? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in. > > > > Have you considered that God is giving you evidence that he exists by > > healing people? Maybe, some day, you'll let it sink in. > > If he is he needs to advertise. Why is it that "god" is always so secretive? > His 'inerrant' word is full of errors and nonsense. His works are always > done by man. That's right, god can't do anything for himself. Almost like > man invented him, isn't it. Have you considered that, Jason? The healings that I mentioned were done by God and not by man. God may be secretive to you but not to everyone. We see evidence of his power on a regular basis. When I seen the Grand Canyon, I could see the evidence of his power. jason Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Jun 13, 1:21 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181646992.799917.21...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 12 Jun., 02:47, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181601347.999940.35...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > In article > > > > > <Jason-1006071559590...@66-52-22-36.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > > > > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > She has > > > > > > witnessed to thousands of people. > > > > > Wow. She's lied to a lot of people then. I find that completely and > > > > utterly morally reprehensible. It is also typical Godbot behaviour. > > > > > Martin > > > > the alternative is "she told the truth to a lot of people then." > > > For which you have absolutely no objective evidence. You have even > > pretty well made it clear that you believe it because you want to. If > > one is a rational being, objective evidence is something that has to > > be accepted, whether we like what it supports or not; but you believe > > because you want to and, supposedly, reject evidence that does not > > support what you like. This makes you irrational and dishonest. > > Do you have objective evidence that time and physics did not exist prior > to the Big Bang? > > Do you have objective evidence that these are two of the steps involved in > the evolution of mankind: > STEP 1 Single cell (example: bacteria) > STEP 2 Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual reproduction). Are you implying that we don't? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_eukaryogenesis Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Jun 13, 1:47 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181649511.087693.129...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 12, 12:52 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181614348.455145.11...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 12, 9:25 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article > > <1181604194.743582.114...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > > > > > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 12, 1:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > > I agree that people just choose to believe whatever they want to > > > believe. > > > > > > > That is true for atheists and is also true for Christians. > > > > > > > Assertion. We know you swallow every lie that your fellow Godbots > > > > > > tell you. We don't. We rely on actual evidence. That's all there is > > > > > > to it and none of your lies will change the actual truth. > > > > > > An atheists swallow everything the scientists tell them if it supports > > > > > their belief system. > > > > > When your assertions have been corrected and yet you repeat them > > > > anyway they can now be fairly called lies. You know better than to > > > > say atheists believe ANYTHING and yet you continue to repeat that lie. > > > > It's a lie to state that I swallow every lie that my fellow Godbots tell ^^^^^^^^^ > > > me. > > > No, it's not. You've demonstrayted time and time again that you are > > willing to believe anything you are told EXCEPT when the person who > > says it is a non believer. That is your prejudice. > > > Don't ever accuse me of lying again. You wouldn't like me when I am ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > angry. > Did I call you a liar? The answer is no. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Jun 13, 2:22 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <UGwbi.623$ma....@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-1106072153560001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <utqr63he40hh9n29rh2c80f0p1v05gj...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:39:16 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> <Jason-1106071839160...@66-52-22-97.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > >> >In article <kkor63tinbmus479tfljt5ib6lmn7o9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > >> ><l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > >> >> On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 17:31:38 -0700, in alt.atheism > > >> >> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > > >> >> <Jason-1106071731380...@66-52-22-97.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: > > > >> >> ... > > >> >> >Bramble, > > >> >> >I agree with many of the points you made. When God created mankind, > > >> >> >he > > >> >> >gave us free will. He did not create robots that were programmed to > > >> >> >do > > >> >> >only good things. As a result of free will, people can decide to do > > >> >> >great > > >> >> >and wonderful things or can use their free will to decide to commit > > >> >> >criminal acts. > > > >> >> >God is indirectly responsible since he created the solar system and > > >> >> >created life--including mankind. However, when people end up in > > >> >> >prison > > >> >> >it's not God's fault. It's the fault of the person that was > > >> >> >exercising his > > >> >> >or her free will. > > > >> >> >Do you see my point? > > > >> >> Man came about as a result of evolution. That is what the evidence > > >> >> shows > > >> >> us. If God created man, He used evolution. You refuse to accept that > > >> >> fact. You prefer lies to the truth, ignorance to knowledge. You call > > >> >> your God a liar. > > > >> >> Why? > > > >> >The first chapter of the book of Genesis states that God created > > >> >mankind, > > >> >some plants and some animals. > > > >> So what? You know there's no evidence that the Bible came from God or is > > >> scientifically accurate. You also know that there is evidence that many > > >> of the stories in Genesis are scientifically in error. > > > >> > I believe that evolution kicked in after the > > >> >creation process was finished. > > > >> I don't care. You have already demonstrated that your opinion in this > > >> area is worthless. > > > >> >It's my opinion, after reading the last > > >> >paragraph of Darwin's book, that Darwin agrees that God created life on > > >> >this planet. > > > >> Even if he did, he does not agree with your false doctrine. > > > >> >I read the last chapter of his book which was posted on a > > >> >website and Darwin used the term CREATOR at least once in that chapter. > > >> >In > > >> >other words, the founder of evolution theory agrees that an intelligent > > >> >designer was involved and actually "breathed [life] into a few forms or > > >> >into one." > > > >> He had very little evidence to go on, so there was no reason for him to > > >> speculate about what happened. We have far more, so it is foolish to > > >> continue to refer to the God of the Gaps. > > > >> If God exists, He must hate you for telling so many lies about what He > > >> did. > > > > Imagine how God feels about atheists. > > > I would imagine he holds them in higher esteem than lying creationists that > > make him look bad :-)). > > I disagree. King Saul was a servant of God Who? Oh, you mean your imaginary friend. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 In article <Xns994DB0A6F64ABfreddybear@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote: > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > news:Jason-1206071509130001@66-52-22-111.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: > > > In article <31d3k4-7or.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> [snips] > >> > >> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:03:44 -0700, Jason wrote: > >> > >> >> It's easy to find people who will tell us what a blasphemous > >> >> infidel you are for saying that the 9/11 Jihadists were not > >> >> pleasing Allah with their actions. > >> > > >> > You already know that millions of people in America agree that the > >> > actions of those men were not pleasing to Jehovah. > >> > >> "in America"? Oh, wonderful. Now someone's religion is invalidated > >> simply by where they live . > > > > I mentioned America since those 3000 people were killed in America. > > Millions of people in other countries also realize that the actions of > > those men were not pleasing to Jehovah. > > > > What is your opinion about those men that killed 3000 people on 9/11? > > > > The question is how you can be sure that you know what God's opinion > is. And right now it looks like you're going by opinion polls. Fred, One of the commandments is related to this subject--Thou shall not Murder. Those men murdered 3000 people on 9/11. They violated one of God's commandments. Jesus said that we should love our neighbor--he did not say anything about killing our neighbors. What is your opinion about those men that killed 3000 people on 9/11? Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Jun 13, 2:28 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1181649884.050718.194...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Martin > > > > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > God > > > > > God doesn't exist. > > > > > created mankind, he > > > > > gave us free will. > > > > > Free will doesn't exist. > > > > > You're 0 for 2. > > > > I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands free will, > > > many Bible doctrines and even issues related to life; sociological and > > > psychological issues--make sense. For example, I now understand why some > > > people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a month each year in > > > third world countries. I also understand why some people do terrible > > > things such as becoming murderers or rapists. > > > Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing ten > > people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about the men who > > killed 3000 people on September 11th because they believed in their > > god? > Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. They would have disagreed. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 In article <Xns994DB060B8F89freddybear@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote: > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > news:Jason-1206071303440001@66-52-22-41.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: > > > In article <Xns994D94878C66Ffreddybear@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone > > <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > >> news:Jason-1206071222580001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net: > >> > >> > In article <5d83hcF31q6f3U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > >> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> > In article > >> >> > <1181649884.050718.194220@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > >> >> > Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> On Jun 12, 1:22 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >> >> > In article > >> >> >> > <1181611488.232237.92...@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > >> >> >> > Martin > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> > > On Jun 12, 8:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >> >> > > > God > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > God doesn't exist. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > created mankind, he > >> >> >> > > > gave us free will. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Free will doesn't exist. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > You're 0 for 2. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > I disagree--Free Will does exist. Once a person understands > >> >> >> > free will, many Bible doctrines and even issues related to > >> >> >> > life; sociological and psychological issues--make sense. For > >> >> >> > example, I now understand why some > >> >> >> > people do wonderful thing such as doctors that spend a month > >> >> >> > each year in > >> >> >> > third world countries. I also understand why some people do > >> >> >> > terrible things such as becoming murderers or rapists. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Are you still telling us that you would be capable of killing > >> >> >> ten people a day if you didn't believe in God? What about the > >> >> >> men who killed 3000 people on September 11th because they > >> >> >> believed in their god? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Martin > >> >> > > >> >> > Martin, > >> >> > Those people that do such things are not pleasing to God. > >> >> > They may believe or think that their actions are pleasing to > >> >> > God--but they are wrong. You can find many cases in history > >> >> > where people done terrible things that they believed were > >> >> > pleasing to God--but were not pleasing to God. > >> >> > Jason > >> >> > >> >> Who are you to judge? > >> > > >> > It's easy to judge the actions of the men that killed 3000 people > >> > on 9/11. > >> > > >> > >> It's easy to find people who will tell us what a blasphemous infidel > >> you are for saying that the 9/11 Jihadists were not pleasing Allah > >> with their actions. > > > > You already know that millions of people in America agree that the > > actions of those men were not pleasing to Jehovah. > > > > Is your religion a popularity contest? No--what is your opinion about those men that killed 3000 people on 9/11? > > -- > Fred Stone > aa# 1369 > "When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to > lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that > seemed like posturing." Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Jun 13, 2:31 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > They place Christians in prisons and mental hospitals in communist > countries. Do you want the government to do the same thing in America? No, there's probably some medication you could take. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Jun 13, 2:36 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <v88t63pod2hnvrp1qs37joi09ogmqo4...@4ax.com>, Don Kresch > > > > > > > > <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: > > In alt.atheism On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:24:17 -0700, J...@nospam.com > > (Jason) let us all know that: > > > >In article <omsr63lbc8asb8qs5gghasksvaqesja...@4ax.com>, Don Kresch > > ><ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: > > > >> In alt.atheism On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 08:23:39 -0700, gudl...@yahoo.com > > >> let us all know that: > > > >> >On 11 Jun., 15:38, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: > > >> >> In alt.atheism On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:28:00 -0700, J...@nospam.com > > >> >> (Jason) let us all know that: > > > >> >> >12 percent agree with you related to one aspect of evolution theory. > > >> >> >88 percent agree with me related to that same aspect of > evolution theory. > > > >> >> Wrong. > > > >> >> Now then: what about my responses to the 20 questions? I'll > > >> >> keep asking until you give me something more substantive than "thank > > >> >> you for answering". > > > >> >How many years do you intend to dedicate? > > > >> Until he gives up and leaves. > > > >You want to try again. > > > You want to actually respond to my answers? Or do you want to > > continue to be a coward? > > > Don > > --- > > aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde > > Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. > > > "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" > > Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" > > Upon your request, we will try again--do you want me to post 10 more questions? How about you go back and post 10 answers to questions WE have asked. Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Jun 13, 1:41 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:Jason-1206071021200001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > > > > > In article <1181646992.799917.21...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > >> On 12 Jun., 02:47, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > In article <1181601347.999940.35...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > >> > Martin > > >> > Phipps <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > > > In article > >> > > > <Jason-1006071559590...@66-52-22-36.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > > >> > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > > > > She has > >> > > > > witnessed to thousands of people. > > >> > > Wow. She's lied to a lot of people then. I find that completely and > >> > > utterly morally reprehensible. It is also typical Godbot behaviour. > > >> > > Martin > > >> > the alternative is "she told the truth to a lot of people then." > > >> For which you have absolutely no objective evidence. You have even > >> pretty well made it clear that you believe it because you want to. If > >> one is a rational being, objective evidence is something that has to > >> be accepted, whether we like what it supports or not; but you believe > >> because you want to and, supposedly, reject evidence that does not > >> support what you like. This makes you irrational and dishonest. > > > Do you have objective evidence that time and physics did not exist prior > > to the Big Bang? > > Mathematics says it didn't. It's more than mathematics. The big bang apparently happened and inflationary theory explains how it happened. Even without inflationary theory we have the second law of thermodynamics which tells us that the big bang was the beginning of time. Even with all this, it is still reasonable to suppose that it wasn't a "first cause" in that one would suppose that there had to be existing preconditions that made the big bang possible in the first place. > > Do you have objective evidence that these are two of the steps involved in > > the evolution of mankind: > > STEP 1 Single cell (example: bacteria) > > STEP 2 Single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual > > reproduction). > > Those aren't the steps of evolution. Why do you continue to be so ignorant? Okay, look, I have to say that it is a bit ironic for you to claim that the gradual change over several generations of a bacteria like cell into an ameoba like cell is not evolution in action. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 In article <1181683568.769547.221730@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, bramble <leopoldo.perdomo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12 jun, 15:20, gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 12 Jun., 08:12, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > But the parents are not responsible for the behavior of an adult > > > > competent child. They may regret have given birth to that child, but > > > > they are not legally responsible for his actions after attaining > > > > majority. They may have raised him in a way that led him to commit his > > > > crimes, but that is a psychological issue rather than a legal one. It > > > > might be a moral issue, depending on how they raised him. > > > > > > > Jason > > > > > cactus, > > > My point was that God is like the parents. > > > > What utter nonsense! The parents are not all-powerful. They cannot > > possibly be responsible for everything the child does. > > > > In much the same way the > > > > > parents were indirectly responsible for the murder since the murder would > > > not have happened if the son had never been born--God is indirectly > > > responsible for evil, since evil would never have happened if God had not > > > created the solar system and life. > > > > Your analogy is transparently invalid. > > If parents would had the ability to change for the better the behavior > of his son, he would surely do it. We want that he would be free, but > free to drive a reasonable life. We, as parents, do no want our kids > to fall into a pool of shit. > But, sometimes, we are too busy or we are not enough vlever, and our > kids began to show bad a attitude, and we do not know how to change or > reverse this. > If we were like gods, our kids would have freedom to behave in a nice > manner and to keep out of trouble. But we are not gods. > So, go is a very bad parent. And this analogy posited by Jason is not > valid. > If there is a god, he would surely change all that. And this is one > of the proves that there is not any god. > Bramble God could have created robots that were programmed by God to do only kind and wonderful things and never do bad things such as murder. Instead of creating programmed robots, God created people that had free will. People will eventually be judged by God in relation to how they used their free will. Did they love God or turn their backs on God? Did they violate God's commandments or follow the commandments? Did they love or hate? Did they do good or evil? etc. Jason Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 12, 2007 Posted June 12, 2007 On Jun 13, 1:42 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-1206071036370001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > Have any experiments been done that has indicated that it is possible for > > a single cell (bacteria) can be induced to evolve into a single animal > > cell (with DNA nucleus cabable of sexual reproduction)? > > > If possible, provide a yes or no answer. > > No one has that. I'm not even sure that it is possible. I think you might > have forgotten a few steps. It's possible. It happened billions of years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_eukaryogenesis Martin Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.