Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 25, 9:16 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <FM2dnSEybe2qW-PbnZ2dnUVZ_qLin...@sti.net>, "David V." > > <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > kmurphy...@houston.rr.com wrote: > > > > Ultimatims are not logical. Being forced to choose between > > > two options doesn't exclude the possibility that a third > > > option exists. Neither creationism nor evolution is correct. > > > Inventing a third option doesn't mean it's the correct one. > > Evolution is a fact. It's not an option. > > Evolution is a theory Evolution is a fact and natuaral selection is the theory taht explains how it works. You've had this explained to you before, Jason. Martin Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <1182718201.208602.124770@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > On 24 Jun., 03:43, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <409r73h3qtei0prif7536hc0fu1h1p9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > snip > > > > > > Jason has spoken. All Arabic-speaking Christians are worshipping a false > > > god because they use the word "Allah" when referring to God. > > > > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God.- Skjul = > tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > Their Bibles are written in Arabic, in which the equivalent to the > English word "God" is "Allah". That would apply to Christian Arabs of > all sects. Furthermore the first Christians did not call their god > "God", since "god" is an English word derived from German. Apparently > you think that only the English language Bibles are valid. I am not > surprised. No, I do not believe that only Bibles written in English are valid. Even if Allah is the word that is used for God in Bibles written in Arabic--that is not a problem. After reading their Bibles, they will realize that the God mentioned in the Holy Bible is the true God and that the moon god is a false God. For those people that believe Yahweh and Allah are the same God--please explain why there is a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Mormon Mosque in the world? Here is some information about the Christians in Iran. 12/24/04 A Look At Iran's Christian Minority By Golnaz Esfandiari Iran is officially designated the "Islamic Republic," yet among its more than 66 million people is a small but important Christian minority. Most of Iran's Christians are Armenians and Assyrians, who remain relatively free to follow their faith. The numbers of Protestants and evangelical Christians are said to be growing. For these people, life is often much more difficult. RFE/RL correspondent Golnaz Esfandiari takes a look at Iran's Christian minority. Prague, 23 December 2004 (RFE/RL) -- Christian Armenians and Assyrians have lived for centuries on the territory of what is today Iran. Vigen, one of Iran's most famous singers, came from the country's Armenian community. He was loved by all Iranians in spite of the fact his faith was different from the vast majority. He died recently, but remains a legend. The number of Armenians, Iran's largest Christian minority, was estimated at about 300,000 in 1979. It has declined in recent times but remains culturally important. Mardo Soghom, the director of RFE/RL's Radio Farda, is Armenian by origin but grew up in Isfahan, in central Iran. "The 400-year history of the Armenian community in Iran is perhaps the greatest example of religious tolerance and peaceful coexistence, even at the time when the country experienced isolation and socio-economic backwardness," Soghom said. "In the 20th century, as the country modernized, the Armenian community thrived both economically and culturally. After the revolution, dislocations and restrictions affecting the general population also created hardships for Armenians, nearly half the community left Iran. Some discriminatory policies and restrictions came into effect, but still community rights are generally protected." Armenians have two seats in the Iranian parliament but continue to face cultural, social, and administrative difficulties. They report discrimination in finding work, and just a few Armenian schools are fortunate enough to have an Armenian schoolmaster. The Assyrian Christian population is estimated at some 10,000. They have one seat in the parliament. Iran is also home to a small number of Catholics and a small but growing number of Protestants. A relatively new phenomenon is the rising number of Muslim-born Iranians who convert to Christianity. Issa Dibaj is the son of reverend Hassan Dibaj, a Christian convert who was jailed and later found murdered in 1994. Issa Dibaj left Iran five years ago and now lives in the U.K. "There is another Christian minority that people know little about, these are Iranians who are born as Muslims and then later become Christians," Dibaj said. "Their number is growing day by day. [There] may be around 100,000 [of them], but no one really knows the exact number." Such Christians run a potentially dangerous risk. Under Islamic law as practiced in Iran, a Muslim who converts to another faith can face the death penalty. The government has refrained from executing people for this in recent years, nevertheless it has taken measure to curb proselytizing by Christians. Some churches have been closed and reports say the authorities are putting pressure on evangelicals not to recruit Muslims or to allow them to attend services. In September, 85 member of the Assemblies of God church were arrested during a conference in Iran. One remains in jail. Dibaj said in spite of the restrictions, he sees a growing interest in Christianity: "[iranians] see that the establishment which came in the name of Islam has brought them only war, rancor, hatred, and killings. At the same time, they see the message of Jesus, which is love. It attracts them through programs they see on satellite or through their Christian friends." He added: "People are very curious, very interested. Iranians [are] open and they like to know more about different cultures, ideas, and religions. I had friends who had been prisoners of war in Iraq, at the university they were my best friends, they were very interested [about my faith], and I gave some of them the Bible." Iranian Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus pretty much like other Christians around the world. They decorate Christmas trees, exchange gifts, and attend services. Depending on the calendar, Armenians and Assyrians celebrate Christmas on 6 January. Others celebrate usually on 24 December. According to some reports Persia may even be the land of origin of the "Three Wise Men" who -- according to the Bible -- arrived bearing gifts for the birth of Christ. Some say they were Persian "Magi" -- members of priestly caste at the time. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036. http://www.rferl.org Quote
Guest cactus Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <FM2dnSEybe2qW-PbnZ2dnUVZ_qLinZ2d@sti.net>, "David V." > <spam@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> kmurphy004@houston.rr.com wrote: >>> Ultimatims are not logical. Being forced to choose between >>> two options doesn't exclude the possibility that a third >>> option exists. Neither creationism nor evolution is correct. >> Inventing a third option doesn't mean it's the correct one. >> Evolution is a fact. It's not an option. > > Evolution is a theory > > So is number theory, so is music theory, and so is Relativity Theory. A theory is the best explanation of some phenomenon, at least until a better one comes along. For your convenience, here is a definition from Webster's Online Dictionary: ____________________________________________________________________ Main Entry: the Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 25, 9:18 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article > <DipthotDipthot-A725FE.16174624062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, > > 655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > > In article > > <Jason-2306071116110...@66-52-22-111.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > I want to make it legal for teachers > > > to teach ID > > > But it is legal to do that... > > > ... in a comparative religions, class, for example. > > > So what's your problem? > > I was referring to high school science and biology classes. Of course, > evolution should also be taught in those same classes. "Intelligent design" has no place in a biology class, Jason, because "Intelligent design" is reliogion and not science. You admitted that yourself when you said that even a child would know that the "designer" was supposed to be God (or Allah as the case may be). Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 25, 9:25 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <dxAfi.41706$5j1.32...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > Martin Phipps wrote: > > > On Jun 24, 11:57 am, cactus <b...@nonespam.com> wrote: > > >> Jason wrote: > > >>> In article <vs2dnZ6aP9D9weDbnZ2dnUVZ_ovin...@comcast.com>, John Popelish > > >>> <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > >>>>> I consider Christianity to be a true religion and conder Jehovah > to be the > > >>>>> only God. I consider Allah to be a false God. > > >>>> (snip) > > >>>> What process, in your life, lead you to these conclusions? > > >>> My parents were Christians which played a role. While in college, I took a > > >>> course related to the World Religions. None of those world religions > > >>> appealed to me. > > >> Then why do you act so ignorant of other faiths? > > > > It's yet another subject he managed to avoid learning anything about. > > > The frightening thing is that he claims to have taken a course in it. > > Maybe he is incapable of learning something that does not match what he > > already believes. > > > He no longer responds to me. I think I may have offended him. At least > > he no longer talks about "life evolving from non-life." If he never > > responds to be again, it will be worth it just for that. If everyone > > took a turn at the harsh education I gave him, he wouldn't have anyone > > to talk to, but at least maybe he wouldn't sound as stupid. > > I usually don't respond to posts that includes derogatory language. > > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life unless it was > proved to me that it could happen in a scientific experiment. Correction: you would never believe that life could evolve from non- life even though it has been proved to you that it could happen in a scientific experiment. You've admitted that no amount of evidence would change your mind so don't lie about that now (yet again). Martin Quote
Guest Martin Phipps Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 25, 9:35 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182718201.208602.124...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 24 Jun., 03:43, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <409r73h3qtei0prif7536hc0fu1h1p9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch > > > snip > > > > > Jason has spoken. All Arabic-speaking Christians are worshipping a false > > > > god because they use the word "Allah" when referring to God. > > > > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God.- Skjul = > > tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > Their Bibles are written in Arabic, in which the equivalent to the > > English word "God" is "Allah". That would apply to Christian Arabs of > > all sects. Furthermore the first Christians did not call their god > > "God", since "god" is an English word derived from German. Apparently > > you think that only the English language Bibles are valid. I am not > > surprised. > > No, I do not believe that only Bibles written in English are valid. Even > if Allah is the word that is used for God in Bibles written in > Arabic--that is not a problem. After reading their Bibles, they will > realize that the God mentioned in the Holy Bible is the true God and that > the moon god is a false God. Why doesn't Christian sun worship render it a pagam religion in your eyes? Martin Quote
Guest John Popelish Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life unless it was > proved to me that it could happen in a scientific experiment. Sorry, but, based on what you have already written, I don't believe you. If scientists, someday, put chemicals into an experiment and a demonstrably living, reproducing things resulted, I am predicting that you would say that now they have to replicate the origin of some living thing you are familiar with, like a goldfish, or a man, before you could believe that those things have a natural, non miraculous, origin. I hope that someday, soon I get to test this prediction. Quote
Guest Bob T. Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Jun 24, 6:35 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > Here is some information about the Christians in Iran. > <snip article> Iran is an excellent example of what happens when religious nutcases are allowed to rule a country. And you, Jason, clearly wish that America was more like Iran. - Bob T. Quote
Guest John Baker Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 16:23:51 -0700, 655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: >In article ><Jason-2306071848530001@66-52-22-68.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> I consider Christianity to be the true religion because I once took a >> class on the World religions and came to the conclusion that Christianity >> was the true religion. The fact that my parents were Christians may also >> have played a role. > >The Jason "brain" at work. A Christian looks at world religions and >decides that Christianity is "true." And he claims to have reached his >conclusion assessing the situation honestly. > >What part of Christian indoctrination consists of learning to lie about >the faith so easily? They don't call it lying. They call it 'apologetics'. <G> Quote
Guest David V. Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life > unless it was proved to me that it could happen in a > scientific experiment. Yet you firmly believe in a god that has even less evidence and no proof. -- Dave "Sacred cows make the best hamburger." Mark Twain. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <G1Ffi.15732$2v1.1567@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, bm1@nonespam.com wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <FM2dnSEybe2qW-PbnZ2dnUVZ_qLinZ2d@sti.net>, "David V." > > <spam@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> kmurphy004@houston.rr.com wrote: > >>> Ultimatims are not logical. Being forced to choose between > >>> two options doesn't exclude the possibility that a third > >>> option exists. Neither creationism nor evolution is correct. > >> Inventing a third option doesn't mean it's the correct one. > >> Evolution is a fact. It's not an option. > > > > Evolution is a theory > > > > > So is number theory, so is music theory, and so is Relativity Theory. > > A theory is the best explanation of some phenomenon, at least until a > better one comes along. > > For your convenience, here is a definition from Webster's Online Dictionary: > ____________________________________________________________________ > Main Entry: the Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <1182735087.582175.135710@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 25, 9:16 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <FM2dnSEybe2qW-PbnZ2dnUVZ_qLin...@sti.net>, "David V." > > > > <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > kmurphy...@houston.rr.com wrote: > > > > > > Ultimatims are not logical. Being forced to choose between > > > > two options doesn't exclude the possibility that a third > > > > option exists. Neither creationism nor evolution is correct. > > > > > Inventing a third option doesn't mean it's the correct one. > > > Evolution is a fact. It's not an option. > > > > Evolution is a theory > > Evolution is a fact and natuaral selection is the theory taht explains > how it works. You've had this explained to you before, Jason. > > Martin I disagree. Evolution is a theory. I looked up the word Evolution in my Webster's Dictionary and it stated that evolution was a theory. I found this term on page 6 of the Nov 2004 issue of National Geographic: "Evolutionary theory" Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <1182735594.401238.200420@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 25, 9:18 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article > > <DipthotDipthot-A725FE.16174624062...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > 655321 <DipthotDipt...@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > > > In article > > > <Jason-2306071116110...@66-52-22-111.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > I want to make it legal for teachers > > > > to teach ID > > > > > But it is legal to do that... > > > > > ... in a comparative religions, class, for example. > > > > > So what's your problem? > > > > I was referring to high school science and biology classes. Of course, > > evolution should also be taught in those same classes. > > "Intelligent design" has no place in a biology class, Jason, because > "Intelligent design" is reliogion and not science. You admitted that > yourself when you said that even a child would know that the > "designer" was supposed to be God (or Allah as the case may be). > > Martin That is true--even children could figure it out. Martin, it will probably never happen. The advocates of evolution will not let it happen. They will take states to court that want to teach ID. They do not want evolution to have to compete with ID. They are afraid that children will realize that ID makes more sense than Evolution. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <9aqdnXSNaY9puuLbnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@sti.net>, "David V." <spam@hotmail.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > > > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life > > unless it was proved to me that it could happen in a > > scientific experiment. > > Yet you firmly believe in a god that has even less evidence and > no proof. I have seen evidence that has convinced me but various posters have made it clear to me that the evidence that I produced did not convince them that there is a God. I am referring to the testimonies of William Kent (he no longer needs a wheel chair) and Cheryl Prewitt (her leg bone grew 2 inches). I googled "miracle healings" and read about dozens of other cases that provided evidence. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <7Y-dncX-Q9ZSueLbnZ2dnUVZ_r6vnZ2d@comcast.com>, John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life unless it was > > proved to me that it could happen in a scientific experiment. > > Sorry, but, based on what you have already written, I don't > believe you. > > If scientists, someday, put chemicals into an experiment and > a demonstrably living, reproducing things resulted, I am > predicting that you would say that now they have to > replicate the origin of some living thing you are familiar > with, like a goldfish, or a man, before you could believe > that those things have a natural, non miraculous, origin. > > I hope that someday, soon I get to test this prediction. No--I would believe it-- if I could see living cells under a microscope. The experiment would have to be "repeatable" by any scientist including science professors that are employed by the ICR college. Quote
Guest David V. Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > > I disagree. Evolution is a theory. As I explained to you before, you do not know the definition of the word 'theory,' and you got it wrong even after seeing it in a dictionary. > I looked up the word Evolution in my Webster's Dictionary..... > And you still don't get it. Is this feigned ignorance on purpose? -- Dave "Sacred cows make the best hamburger." Mark Twain. Quote
Guest David V. Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <9aqdnXSNaY9puuLbnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@sti.net>, "David > V." <spam@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> Jason wrote: >> >>> I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life >>> unless it was proved to me that it could happen in a >>> scientific experiment. >> >> Yet you firmly believe in a god that has even less evidence >> and no proof. > > > I have seen evidence.... There is no evidence to see. You BELIEVE you saw something but that's only because that's what you wanted to see. > I am referring to the testimonies of William Kent (he no > longer needs a wheel chair) and Cheryl Prewitt (her leg bone > grew 2 inches Those are claims, not evidence. As has been told to you before, those claims are not backed up by anything except more claims. Those people are lying. -- Dave "Sacred cows make the best hamburger." Mark Twain. Quote
Guest David V. Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > > No--I would believe it-- if I could see living cells under a > microscope. I've seen living cells under a microscope. I've also done the Miller/Urey experiment myself and came up with organic matter that was not there before. > The experiment would have to be "repeatable" by any scientist > including science professors that are employed by the ICR > college. The "professors" at the ICR college are not competent enough to do the experiment. Most have no real degrees and most are working out of their field. -- Dave "Sacred cows make the best hamburger." Mark Twain. Quote
Guest John Popelish Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <7Y-dncX-Q9ZSueLbnZ2dnUVZ_r6vnZ2d@comcast.com>, John Popelish > <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> >>> I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life unless it was >>> proved to me that it could happen in a scientific experiment. >> Sorry, but, based on what you have already written, I don't >> believe you. >> >> If scientists, someday, put chemicals into an experiment and >> a demonstrably living, reproducing things resulted, I am >> predicting that you would say that now they have to >> replicate the origin of some living thing you are familiar >> with, like a goldfish, or a man, before you could believe >> that those things have a natural, non miraculous, origin. >> >> I hope that someday, soon I get to test this prediction. > > No--I would believe it-- if I could see living cells under a microscope. Nobody says they would be cells. Cells are the result of the last time natural causes brought forth life, on this planet. And those cells have been very efficient, ever since, at consuming energy rich molecules for their metabolism, making it very unlikely that other, completely novel forms of life will ever get a chance to form here. But in the lab, protected from the appetites of existing living forms, nobody knows what other possibilities might unfold. Cells have proved to be a very versatile and functional vehicle for life, but we don't know if other structures, based on other chemistry can live. But this while area or abiogenesis research is very interesting to me. If we find novel forms of living chemistry on other planets, it will help to give us a better idea what the possibilities for living systems might include. Right now, we have essentially a single family tree to observe, and though some of our cousins are pretty weird, all have a distinct family resemblance at the biochemical level. > The experiment would have to be "repeatable" by any scientist including > science professors that are employed by the ICR college. It would be some of the first science they have ever done. I would trust people who have been doing biochemical science for a long time, a lot more. What research results have ICR professors ever produced? They appear to be strictly a propaganda machine, defending creation dogma. Have they done any experiments that miraculously create life? Quote
Guest Don Kresch Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In alt.atheism On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:53:18 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) let us all know that: >In article <1182735087.582175.135710@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, Martin >Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 25, 9:16 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <FM2dnSEybe2qW-PbnZ2dnUVZ_qLin...@sti.net>, "David V." >> > >> > <s...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> > > kmurphy...@houston.rr.com wrote: >> > >> > > > Ultimatims are not logical. Being forced to choose between >> > > > two options doesn't exclude the possibility that a third >> > > > option exists. Neither creationism nor evolution is correct. >> > >> > > Inventing a third option doesn't mean it's the correct one. >> > > Evolution is a fact. It's not an option. >> > >> > Evolution is a theory >> >> Evolution is a fact and natuaral selection is the theory taht explains >> how it works. You've had this explained to you before, Jason. >> >> Martin > >I disagree. Evolution is a theory. So's gravity. 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 Free Lunch Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 18:35:42 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2406071835420001@66-52-22-6.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <1182718201.208602.124770@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, >gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: > >> On 24 Jun., 03:43, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > In article <409r73h3qtei0prif7536hc0fu1h1p9...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >> >> snip >> >> > >> > > Jason has spoken. All Arabic-speaking Christians are worshipping a false >> > > god because they use the word "Allah" when referring to God. >> > >> > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true God.- Skjul = >> tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - >> >> Their Bibles are written in Arabic, in which the equivalent to the >> English word "God" is "Allah". That would apply to Christian Arabs of >> all sects. Furthermore the first Christians did not call their god >> "God", since "god" is an English word derived from German. Apparently >> you think that only the English language Bibles are valid. I am not >> surprised. > >No, I do not believe that only Bibles written in English are valid. Even >if Allah is the word that is used for God in Bibles written in >Arabic--that is not a problem. After reading their Bibles, they will >realize that the God mentioned in the Holy Bible is the true God and that >the moon god is a false God. The God of Islam is not the moon god. You are a fatuous idiot who is so taken with his own arguments that you cannot bother to learn a thing. You mock God with your lies. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:10:00 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2406072010000001@66-52-22-6.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <7Y-dncX-Q9ZSueLbnZ2dnUVZ_r6vnZ2d@comcast.com>, John Popelish ><jpopelish@rica.net> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> >> > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life unless it was >> > proved to me that it could happen in a scientific experiment. >> >> Sorry, but, based on what you have already written, I don't >> believe you. >> >> If scientists, someday, put chemicals into an experiment and >> a demonstrably living, reproducing things resulted, I am >> predicting that you would say that now they have to >> replicate the origin of some living thing you are familiar >> with, like a goldfish, or a man, before you could believe >> that those things have a natural, non miraculous, origin. >> >> I hope that someday, soon I get to test this prediction. > >No--I would believe it-- if I could see living cells under a microscope. > >The experiment would have to be "repeatable" by any scientist including >science professors that are employed by the ICR college. > ICR does not have any scientists, so they would have to hire some. Then independent observers would have to make sure that the new scientists weren't suborned. After all, the ICR has a good gig telling people lies about science. They have you suckered really well. You still haven't told us how much money they have defrauded you of by their lies. If you are confused, all of their money is collected by fraud, all of it. Whatever you gave them came to them because they lied to you. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:03:16 -0700, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-2406072003160001@66-52-22-6.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>: >In article <9aqdnXSNaY9puuLbnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@sti.net>, "David V." ><spam@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> > >> > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life >> > unless it was proved to me that it could happen in a >> > scientific experiment. >> >> Yet you firmly believe in a god that has even less evidence and >> no proof. > >I have seen evidence that has convinced me but various posters have made >it clear to me that the evidence that I produced did not convince them >that there is a God. It's not evidence. You have never offered evidence. You don't get to redefine a word to have your way. > >I am referring to the testimonies of William Kent (he no longer needs a >wheel chair) and Cheryl Prewitt (her leg bone grew 2 inches). I googled >"miracle healings" and read about dozens of other cases that provided >evidence. > >Jason > -- "... There's glory for you." "I don't know what you mean by 'glory,'" Alice said. Humpty Dumpty smiles contemptuously. "Of course you don't--till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!'" "But glory doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument," Alice objected. "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master--that's all." Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <1182735702.411891.128530@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 25, 9:25 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > In article <dxAfi.41706$5j1.32...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b...@nonespam.com wrote: > > > Martin Phipps wrote: > > > > On Jun 24, 11:57 am, cactus <b...@nonespam.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >>> In article <vs2dnZ6aP9D9weDbnZ2dnUVZ_ovin...@comcast.com>, John Popelish > > > >>> <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: > > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>> I consider Christianity to be a true religion and conder Jehovah > > to be the > > > >>>>> only God. I consider Allah to be a false God. > > > >>>> (snip) > > > >>>> What process, in your life, lead you to these conclusions? > > > >>> My parents were Christians which played a role. While in college, I took a > > > >>> course related to the World Religions. None of those world religions > > > >>> appealed to me. > > > >> Then why do you act so ignorant of other faiths? > > > > > > It's yet another subject he managed to avoid learning anything about. > > > > > The frightening thing is that he claims to have taken a course in it. > > > Maybe he is incapable of learning something that does not match what he > > > already believes. > > > > > He no longer responds to me. I think I may have offended him. At least > > > he no longer talks about "life evolving from non-life." If he never > > > responds to be again, it will be worth it just for that. If everyone > > > took a turn at the harsh education I gave him, he wouldn't have anyone > > > to talk to, but at least maybe he wouldn't sound as stupid. > > > > I usually don't respond to posts that includes derogatory language. > > > > I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life unless it was > > proved to me that it could happen in a scientific experiment. > > Correction: you would never believe that life could evolve from non- > life even though it has been proved to you that it could happen in a > scientific experiment. You've admitted that no amount of evidence > would change your mind so don't lie about that now (yet again). > > Martin I am not qualified to judge experiments. For example, if the scientists added DNA from a frog to the experiment, I doubt that would qualify. I would trust the judgements of the science professors that are employed by ICR's college. If they were able to repeat the experiment, I would believe that life could evolve from non-life. Also, if I read an article about the experiment in a magazine such as National Geographic---I would believe that life could evolve from non-life. Jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 25, 2007 Posted June 25, 2007 In article <8g6u731o90673ank4uvv85k002ga1b5uom@4ax.com>, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: > In alt.atheism On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 18:25:31 -0700, Jason@nospam.com > (Jason) let us all know that: > > >I would never believe that life could evolve from non-life unless it was > >proved to me that it could happen in a scientific experiment. > > So where did god come from? I know that you cop-out every time > this is asked, but that just shows how hypocritical you are. > > > 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" The Bible does not indicate how God came to be. 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.