Jump to content

Evolution is Just Junk Science


Recommended Posts

Guest Don Kresch
Posted

In alt.atheism On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 19:53:29 -0700, Jason@nospam.com

(Jason) let us all know that:

>In article <1k8u63p8g5ekm82c78psrvmlh24v5qbs6t@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>

>> 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.

>

>not an answer

 

It is an answer.

 

>> > 2. Where did matter come from?

>>

>> It's a form of energy and is a result of the Big Bang.

>good answer--but where did the energy re: Big Bang come from?

 

Always there.

>>

>> > 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.

>not an answer

 

It is an answer.

 

 

Now then: when will you respond to my answers of your original

20 questions?

 

 

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"

  • Replies 19.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <1181691449.474813.233740@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin

Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 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

 

Martin,

I don't want to be argumentative re: to the Big Bang. However, I continue

to believe that it is speculation that the big bang was the beginning of

time. Do you believe that it is speculation or a fact?

 

Related to your last point. That would be evidence of evolution if it

really happened. An experiment would have to prove that it could happen.

If not, it's speculation. As you know speculation is not evidence.

 

That leads to another question:

Is a mathematical model evidence or speculation?

 

The reason is because it seems to me that physicists could develop another

mathematical model several years later that disproved the first

mathematical model and the same thing could happen the following year.

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <zJFbi.1835$H7.1053@bigfe9>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "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.

 

He wanted to have fellowship and a relationship with mankind.

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <1181691670.522388.310330@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

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

> >

> > news:Jason-1006071822330001@66-52-22-1.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

>

> > > If it was a rural area of a state in the Bible Belt--the jury would rule

> > > that Cheryl was telling the truth.

>

> So basically you're calling the people from the Bible Belt a bunch of

> ignorant Godbots. How nice of you. :p

>

> Martin

 

Martin,

I have lived in a rural area of the Bible Belt and I have lived in

California. It's as different as night and day. As far as I know, there

were no non-Christians in the entire town when I lived in that small town

in Virginia. There are lots of non-Christians in the area of California

where I live. This town has two different colleges. I exchanged posts with

someone that lives in England. He told me that there are almost no

Christians in the town where he lives.

Jason

Guest cactus
Posted

Jason wrote:

> 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.

>

>

And yet this god allows countless people to die, some in awful ways.

Does this also prove that this god exists?

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <1181691834.624172.310280@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jun 13, 1:54 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > If there was a court case related to this issue, Cheryl

> > > Prewitt could produce her medical records (eg X-Rays). All of medical

> > > staff that were present when a doctor removed two inches of a leg bone

> > > would testify.

>

> They would testify to the fact that she was a liar. I would LOVE to

> see that. This is exactly why sje "preaches to the converted", ie to

> the naive and stupid.

>

> Martin

 

Martin,

Are you stating that all Christians are naive and stupid? I know that you

would challenge me if stated the same thing about the advocates of

evolution.

Jason

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <DKFbi.1837$H7.1544@bigfe9>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "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?

 

They were murderers that have no understanding of the true God.

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <1181695356.967104.238440@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin

Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jun 13, 4:03 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > In article <Xns994D94878C66Ffreddyb...@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

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

> > >news:Jason-1206071222580001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net:

> >

> > > > In article <5d83hcF31q6f...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

> > > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote:

> >

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

> > > >>news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > > >> > 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?

> >

> > > >> >> 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.

> >

> > > >> 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.

>

> We'd let Jehovah and Allah fight it out amongst themselves if either

> of them existed.

>

> By the way, Genesis 1 says "El" created the universe and mankind but

> Genesis 2 says it was "Yahweh".

>

> Martin

 

Martin,

Do you have the verses? El may be one of the many names of God.

Jason

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <jbdu63dbf8uae5r7fv9mee2g40sb6q0ks1@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

<lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:09:13 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> <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.

>

> So you say. Apparently you never read the Old Testament. Jehovah was a

> pretty bloodthirsty tyrant. He might love the murders of 9/11 and the

> wars that happened afterward.

>

> >What is your opinion about those men that killed 3000 people on 9/11?

>

> They are evil. But I don't have to defend the evil acts that people do

> in the name of God.

>

> Remember, they worship the same God you do.

 

They worship a God named Allah. There were some people in the Bible that

worshipped a false God named Baal. Judges 2:13. I consider Allah to be a

false God. I already know people will diagree with me.

jason

Guest Martin
Posted

On Jun 13, 10:57 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> Your grade is A--I did not write the questions. I googled "Questions for

> evolutionists"

> I had a hard time understanding some of the questions since they were

> poorly written.

 

If you want to find something on evolution that is not written by a

moron then you probably should google "evolution" and not

"evolutionist". Just a suggestion. :)

 

Martin

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <1181691015.300853.260290@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 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

 

--or perhaps some medication for the people that believe their oldest

known ancestor is bacteria. --just kidding

Guest Martin
Posted

On Jun 13, 11:48 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181691834.624172.310...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

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

> > On Jun 13, 1:54 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > If there was a court case related to this issue, Cheryl

> > > > Prewitt could produce her medical records (eg X-Rays). All of medical

> > > > staff that were present when a doctor removed two inches of a leg bone

> > > > would testify.

>

> > They would testify to the fact that she was a liar. I would LOVE to

> > see that. This is exactly why she "preaches to the converted", ie to

> > the naive and stupid.

> Are you stating that all Christians are naive and stupid? I know that you

> would challenge me if stated the same thing about the advocates of

> evolution.

 

You already are on record for implying that people who advocate

evolution are "fucking stupid", Jason. All I am doing is correcting

your error and telling you the truth.

 

Martin

Guest Martin
Posted

On Jun 13, 11:52 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <DKFbi.1837$H7.1544@bigfe9>, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

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

> >news:Jason-1206071629120001@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > > In article <Xns994DB060B8F89freddyb...@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone

> > > <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

>

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

> > >>news:Jason-1206071303440001@66-52-22-41.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net:

>

> > >> > In article <Xns994D94878C66Ffreddyb...@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone

> > >> > <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

>

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

> > >> >>news:Jason-1206071222580001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net:

>

> > >> >> > In article <5d83hcF31q6f...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

> > >> >> > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote:

>

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

> > >> >> >>news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > >> >> >> > 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?

>

> > >> >> >> >> 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?

>

> They were murderers that have no understanding of the true God.

 

It's hard to understand something when it doesn't really exist.

 

Martin

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <kgdu631ao4u245o7l0ekrvdt9kjvekggme@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

<lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:31:58 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

> <Jason-1206071131590001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> >In article <1181649634.232900.8560@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> ><phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >

> >> On Jun 12, 1:00 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> >> > In article <1181614412.939840.97...@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> >> >

> >> >

> >> >

> >> >

> >> >

> >> >

> >> >

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

> >> > > On Jun 12, 9:39 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> >> > > > 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

> >> >

> >> > > You keep talking about your imaginary friend as if he were real. You

> >> > > need to be commited for psychiatric observation.

> >>

> >> > They will have to build a lot of mental hospitals. According to the 2005

> >> > Time Almanac, there are 1.9 billion Christians in the world. (page 359).

> >>

> >> Yes, the rational people of the world have a lot of work to do. You

> >> don't think we know that?

> >>

> >> Martin

> >

> >Martin,

> >They place Christians in prisons and mental hospitals in communist

> >countries. Do you want the government to do the same thing in America?

>

> You are a humorless fool.

>

> >A Christian in Viet Nam was recently murdered by prison guards.

>

> Christianity, Buddhism and other religions are tolerated in Vietnam.

> Many in Vietnam are both Catholic and Buddhist, so the murder, if it

> happened, wasn't motivated merely because the prisoner was a Christian.

 

He was placed in prison because he was the preacher in an underground or

secret church. They have official churches where they can easily keep

track of the Christians. They don't want millions of people attending

secret churches so they place the preachers in prison.

Guest Martin
Posted

On Jun 13, 11:59 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181695356.967104.238...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

>

>

>

>

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

> > On Jun 13, 4:03 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > In article <Xns994D94878C66Ffreddyb...@66.150.105.47>, Fred Stone

>

> > > <fston...@earthling.com> wrote:

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

> > > >news:Jason-1206071222580001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net:

>

> > > > > In article <5d83hcF31q6f...@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff"

> > > > > <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote:

>

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

> > > > >>news:Jason-1206071128330001@66-52-22-95.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> > > > >> > 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?

>

> > > > >> >> 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.

>

> > > > >> 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.

>

> > We'd let Jehovah and Allah fight it out amongst themselves if either

> > of them existed.

>

> > By the way, Genesis 1 says "El" created the universe and mankind but

> > Genesis 2 says it was "Yahweh".

> Do you have the verses? El may be one of the many names of God.

 

In fact, Genesis 1 talks about the Elohim, which means "gods", in

plural. (e.g. Genesis 6:2, "... the sons of Elohim saw the daughters

of men that they were fair; and they took them for wives... ,")

 

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim

 

Martin

Guest Martin
Posted

On Jun 13, 12:06 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <jbdu63dbf8uae5r7fv9mee2g40sb6q0...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

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

> > Remember, they worship the same God you do.

>

> They worship a God named Allah. There were some people in the Bible that

> worshipped a false God named Baal. Judges 2:13. I consider Allah to be a

> false God. I already know people will diagree with me.

 

Indeed. And what did the Hebrews do to people who worshipped that

false god?

 

"While the Israelites were camped at Acacia, some of the men defiled

themselves by sleeping with the local Moabite women. These women

invited them to attend sacrifices to their gods, and soon the

Israelites were feasting with them and worshiping the gods of Moab.

Before long Israel was joining in the worship of Baal of Peor, causing

the LORD's anger to blaze against his people. The LORD issued the

following command to Moses: "Seize all the ringleaders and execute

them before the LORD in broad daylight, so his fierce anger will turn

away from the people of Israel." So Moses ordered Israel's judges to

execute everyone who had joined in worshiping Baal of Peor. Just then

one of the Israelite men brought a Midianite woman into the camp,

right before the eyes of Moses and all the people, as they were

weeping at the entrance of the Tabernacle. When Phinehas son of

Eleazar and grandson of Aaron the priest saw this, he jumped up and

left the assembly. Then he took a spear and rushed after the man into

his tent. Phinehas thrust the spear all the way through the man's body

and into the woman's stomach. So the plague against the Israelites

was stopped, but not before 24,000 people had died. (Numbers 25:1-9

NLT)"

 

The Moslems also think that Jehovah is a false god and they believe

that Allah wants them to kill the followers of the false god.

 

Now do you understand. It is RELIGION that is the problem. It

doesn't matter WHICH one.

 

Martin

Guest Martin
Posted

On Jun 13, 12:10 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181691015.300853.260...@r19g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

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

> > 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.

>

> --or perhaps some medication for the people that believe their oldest

> known ancestor is bacteria. --just kidding

 

I don't believe you. I think you are serious. I know I was.

 

Martin

Guest George Chen
Posted

On Jun 13, 12:29 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181699263.750690.39...@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

>

>

>

>

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

> > On Jun 13, 7:58 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > "Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>

> > >news:1181691449.474813.233740@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com...

>

> > > > 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.

>

> > > I understand what was involved. I just don't intend to waste my time and a

> > > willful fool like Jason.

>

> > Answering his stupid questions is fun. It's when he accuses him of

> > not answering him that I get pissed off. That plus the fact that he

> > never bothers to answer any of OUR questions, saying "I don't have my

> > chemistry text anymore" or "I donated that book to a second hand book

> > store".

>

> > > >> > 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.

>

> > > Simple Martin, because it wasn't STEP 1 and STEP 2.

>

> > STEP 1.0 and STEP 2.0? It's a recipe for mankind. Just add heat and

> > water and wait 3.5 billion years. :)

> It's speculation. Speculation is not evidence. There are two other

> possibilities:

> 1. intelligent designer

 

With all due respect (and at this point we honestly affording you very

little) this is not a possibility because God does not exist.

> 2. ancient astronauts from another planet.

 

Which doesn't answer the question of where life ultimately came from.

Nor does God belief for that matter: do you believe God to be alive?

If life requires creation then who created God?

> You choice is abiogenesis.

> My choice is an intelligent designer.

> Erick Von Dannikan's choice is ancient astronauts.

 

You and Erick have a lot in common, You're both kooks who believe

things without evidence.

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <1181699263.750690.39800@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Martin

<phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 13, 7:58 am, "Ralph" <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > "Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

> >

> > news:1181691449.474813.233740@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com...

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > > 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.

> >

> > I understand what was involved. I just don't intend to waste my time and a

> > willful fool like Jason.

>

> Answering his stupid questions is fun. It's when he accuses him of

> not answering him that I get pissed off. That plus the fact that he

> never bothers to answer any of OUR questions, saying "I don't have my

> chemistry text anymore" or "I donated that book to a second hand book

> store".

>

> > >> > 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.

> >

> > Simple Martin, because it wasn't STEP 1 and STEP 2.

>

> STEP 1.0 and STEP 2.0? It's a recipe for mankind. Just add heat and

> water and wait 3.5 billion years. :)

>

> Martin

 

It's speculation. Speculation is not evidence. There are two other

possibilities:

1. intelligent designer

2. ancient astronauts from another planet.

 

You choice is abiogenesis.

My choice is an intelligent designer.

Erick Von Dannikan's choice is ancient astronauts.

Guest George Chen
Posted

On Jun 13, 12:40 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181702651.987664.33...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob

> T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:

> > On Jun 12, 8:11 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > > In article <1181690674.590547.210...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

>

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

> > > > 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

>

> > > Martin,

> > > It is based on speculation. I have been told by two people (yourself

> > > included) that scientists have not conducted an experiment which had a

> > > result that showed that a single cell (example: bacteria) evolved into a

> > > single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual reproductin).

>

> > It's been explained to you before that this is a poor choice of

> > questions, and not really meaningful.

>

> > > I realize that scientists believe it happened millions of years ago. If it

> > > happened naturally millions of years ago, scientists should be able to

> > > make it happen again in a well designed experiment.

>

> > Right... and scientists who understand how our Sun was formed should

> > be able to create a new star in the laboratory to prove it in a well-

> > designed experiment, right? In other words, no - there is no reason

> > to expect scientists to be able to recreate the early history of life,

> > which occurred gradually over millions of years. (This has also been

> > pointed out to you before, of course.)

> There is a world of difference between conducting scientific experiments

> in labs compared to creating a star.

 

And there's a world of difference between showing how life could have

arisen and actually duplicating the process that originally took 500

million years.

> The scientists believe that it happened naturally. It's very likely that

> it involved elements (or a combination of elements) and amino acids.

 

The molecules necessary for life have already been created in

laboratory experiments.

> If it happened once--naturally--scientists should be able to cause it

> happen again.

 

And so they have been able to: just as protiens can be made from RNA

so can RNA be made from protiens. It would be a slow process,

however, if it took place outside of a living cell, however.

Guest George Chen
Posted

On Jun 13, 12:44 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <1181699847.672385.230...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin

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

> > On Jun 13, 8:33 am, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> > > On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:50:33 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

> > > Martin <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote in

> > > <1181613033.399853.282...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>:

>

> > > >On Jun 12, 7:48 am, Matt Silberstein

> > > ><RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nos...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>

> > > >> And, yet, you know that when Christians pray and things happen it is

> > > >> because they pray. But somehow when Muslims pray and things happen it

> > > >> is not because God did it.

>

> > > >Not Yahweh anyway.

>

> > > Of course it is. Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Bahai all agree that

> > > they worship the same God, the God of Abraham. Sure, they all tell

> > > different stories and claim the others are wrong, but they're all pretty

> > > clear that they worship the same God.

>

> > > If there is a God, it appears that He enjoys the confusion, because He's

> > > made no effort to clear it up.

>

> > Genesis 1 talks of the Elohim. It is Genesis 2 that speaks of

> > Yahweh. According to Exodus, Yahweh insisted that he be worshipped

> > ahead of "other gods".

> They are different names for God.

 

They are different gods. I

read on wikipedia some speculation that Yahweh is

based on the Sumerian god Ea / Enki.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahu

 

"According to some, Yam was also called Ya'a or Yaw.

Damaged text in KTU 1.2 iv has been interpreted by

Mark S. Smith as describing a renaming of Yam from an

original name Yaw. The resemblance of the latter to

the Tetragrammaton YHWH led to speculation over a

possible connection between Yam and God of the Hebrew

Bible. However even if the reading is correct many

scholars argue the names have different roots and

reject the idea that they are related. Another

suggested reading of the name is Ya'a and it has also

been suggested as an early form of the divine name

Yah, Yahu. Earlier archaeologists like Theophilus G.

Pinches[1] quoted the research of Hommel, Professor of

Semitic languages at Munich, who suggested "that this

god Ya is another form of the name Ea...". By this

theory Ya'a thus appears to have been a God of the

waters, both salt (Yam) and fresh (Nahar), in some

ways similar to the Mesopotamian God Ea.[2] This view

has been supported in more recent times by

archaeologists like Jean Bottero[3] and others,[4]

although this is disputed by other scholars.[5][6]"

 

In Sumerian mythology, Enki was the creator of

mankind.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enki

 

"In Sumerian myth, Enki lay asleep in the depths of

the primeval ocean, unable to hear the lament of the

gods as they complained about the difficulty of

cultivating wheat and making bread. Eventually the

primeval sea, Nammu brought the gods' tears to Enki.

Enki, as the god of wisdom, was expected to devise a

solution, so he solicited Nammu and the birth-goddess

Ninmah to use clay to form the first men, who would

toil and farm so that the gods could relax. [7]

 

[...]

 

"Another myth, "Enki and Adapa", tells of how humanity

loses the chance at immortality. Adapa U-an (Berossus'

Oannes), who is Abgallu (Ab = Water, Gal = Great, Lu =

Man) (Akkadian Apkallu), Enki's advisor, to the first

king of Eridu, Allulim, inadvertently breaks the wings

of the South Wind, Ninlil (See Lilith) (Nin = Lady,

Lil = Air), daughter of Anu (the Heavens) and wife to

Enlil, king of the gods. In terror at the thought of

their retribution, Adapa seeks the advice of Enki.

Enki advises that Adapa make a deep and sincere

atonement, but advises Adapa to eat nothing given to

him by the gods, as he will probably be given the food

of death, out of their anger at his deeds. Adapa takes

Enki's advice, but the gods, so impressed by the

sincerity of Adapa's sorrow and grief as to what he

did, offered instead the fruit of immortality. Adapa

remembering Enki's words, refuses, and so misses out

on the chance of eternal life."

 

So Enki created man and one of his creations was named

Adapa and Adapa angered the gods and ended up losing

his chance at eternal life.

 

So who is Satan? "Satan" is a Hebrew word meaning

"adversary".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan

 

So who was the adversary of Yam? The adversary of Yam

was Baal ("Lord") Hadad.

 

"Of all the gods, Yam holds special hostility against

Baal Hadad over the divine assembly. Yam is a deity of

the sea and his palace is in the abyss associated with

the depths, or Biblical tehwom, of the oceans. (This

is not to be confused with the abode of Mot, the ruler

of the netherworlds.) In Ugaritic texts, Yam's special

enemy Hadad is also known as the "king of heaven" and

the "first born son" of El, whom ancient Greeks

identified with their god Kronos, just as Baal was

identified with Zeus, Yam with Poseidon and Mot with

Hades. Yam wished to become the Lord god in his place.

In turns the two beings kill each other, yet Hadad is

resurrected and Yam also returns. Some authors have

suggested that these tales reflect the experience of

seasonal cycles in the Levant."

 

Thus, we can see that Yahweh can be associated with

both the Sumerian god Enki and the Greek god Poseidon

while Hadad can be associated not only with the Greek

god Zeus (and the Roman god Jupiter) but also the

Akkadian god Adad, the Anatolian god Teshub, the

Egyptian god Set and the Sumerian god Ishkur. In

Sumerian mythology, Ishkur was sometimes refered to as

the son of Anu and brother of Enki and sometimes

refered to as the brother of Ishtar and a descendent

of both Enki and his brother Enlil. (See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adad )

 

That Ishkur was referred to as the son of Anu may be a

mistake based on the fact that he was considered one

of the Anunnaku, the race of beings descended from Anu

collectively known as the sons of Anu. (See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anu )

 

It is worth pointing out at this point that Anu was

known to the Hebrews as El (See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El ) and that the Annuaki

correspond to the Hebrew Elohim (See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim). The Islamic

name Allah is believed to be derived from the name El.

(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah ).

 

Historically then El (the creator of the universe)

and Yahweh (the creator of mankind) were not the same

god. Judeo-Christian tradition combines the two gods

into one. It would appear as though Genesis chapter

one originally spoke about El and Genesis chapter two

originally spoke about Yahweh.

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <1181702651.987664.33340@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob

T." <bob@synapse-cs.com> wrote:

> On Jun 12, 8:11 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> > In article <1181690674.590547.210...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

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

> > > 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

> >

> > Martin,

> > It is based on speculation. I have been told by two people (yourself

> > included) that scientists have not conducted an experiment which had a

> > result that showed that a single cell (example: bacteria) evolved into a

> > single animal cell (with DNA nucleus capable of sexual reproductin).

>

> It's been explained to you before that this is a poor choice of

> questions, and not really meaningful.

> >

> > I realize that scientists believe it happened millions of years ago. If it

> > happened naturally millions of years ago, scientists should be able to

> > make it happen again in a well designed experiment.

>

> Right... and scientists who understand how our Sun was formed should

> be able to create a new star in the laboratory to prove it in a well-

> designed experiment, right? In other words, no - there is no reason

> to expect scientists to be able to recreate the early history of life,

> which occurred gradually over millions of years. (This has also been

> pointed out to you before, of course.)

>

> - Bob T.

>

> > - Show quoted text -

 

Bob,

There is a world of difference between conducting scientific experiments

in labs compared to creating a star.

 

The scientists believe that it happened naturally. It's very likely that

it involved elements (or a combination of elements) and amino acids.

 

If it happened once--naturally--scientists should be able to cause it

happen again.

 

Jason

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <1181699847.672385.230670@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Martin

<phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 13, 8:33 am, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> > On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:50:33 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

> > Martin <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote in

> > <1181613033.399853.282...@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com>:

> >

> > >On Jun 12, 7:48 am, Matt Silberstein

> > ><RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nos...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> >

> > >> And, yet, you know that when Christians pray and things happen it is

> > >> because they pray. But somehow when Muslims pray and things happen it

> > >> is not because God did it.

> >

> > >Not Yahweh anyway.

> >

> > Of course it is. Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Bahai all agree that

> > they worship the same God, the God of Abraham. Sure, they all tell

> > different stories and claim the others are wrong, but they're all pretty

> > clear that they worship the same God.

> >

> > If there is a God, it appears that He enjoys the confusion, because He's

> > made no effort to clear it up.

>

> Genesis 1 talks of the Elohim. It is Genesis 2 that speaks of

> Yahweh. According to Exodus, Yahweh insisted that he be worshipped

> ahead of "other gods".

>

> Martin

 

They are different names for God.

Guest Jason
Posted

In article <gfou63h4mfoelteph2jnou1er6o8n7ha07@4ax.com>, Don Kresch

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

> In alt.atheism On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 19:53:29 -0700, Jason@nospam.com

> (Jason) let us all know that:

>

> >In article <1k8u63p8g5ekm82c78psrvmlh24v5qbs6t@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

> ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> >

> >> 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.

> >

> >not an answer

>

> It is an answer.

>

>

> >> > 2. Where did matter come from?

> >>

> >> It's a form of energy and is a result of the Big Bang.

> >good answer--but where did the energy re: Big Bang come from?

>

> Always there.

>

> >>

> >> > 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.

> >not an answer

>

> It is an answer.

>

>

> Now then: when will you respond to my answers of your original

> 20 questions?

>

>

> 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"

 

Repost the questions and your answers. I don't save old posts. I probably

agreed with your answers which is the reason I did not comment. For

example, Martin answered the questions I posted yesterday and I did not

disagree with any of his answers so I did not comment related to every

answer. He actully answered one of the questions despite the fact that the

question was poorly worded. I did not compile the list of questions. I

googled "Questions for evolutionists" and found lots of sites.

jason

Guest Bob T.
Posted

On Jun 12, 9:06 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

> In article <jbdu63dbf8uae5r7fv9mee2g40sb6q0...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

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

> > On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:09:13 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism

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

> > <Jason-1206071509130...@66-52-22-111.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

> > >In article <31d3k4-7or....@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason

> > ><kbjarna...@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.

>

> > So you say. Apparently you never read the Old Testament. Jehovah was a

> > pretty bloodthirsty tyrant. He might love the murders of 9/11 and the

> > wars that happened afterward.

>

> > >What is your opinion about those men that killed 3000 people on 9/11?

>

> > They are evil. But I don't have to defend the evil acts that people do

> > in the name of God.

>

> > Remember, they worship the same God you do.

>

> They worship a God named Allah. There were some people in the Bible that

> worshipped a false God named Baal. Judges 2:13. I consider Allah to be a

> false God. I already know people will diagree with me.

 

I agree with you! Allah is indeed a false god, as there is no such

thing as a real god.

 

- Bob T.

> jason- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

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...