RunRyder RC
WATCH
 711 pages [ <<    <     160     ( 161 )     162     NEXT    >> ] 320505 views TOPIC CLOSED
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › God Did Create Mankind.
01-13-2011 01:34 AM  7 years agoPost 3201
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

it comes down to science VS imagination. and science is not basing there hypothisis from imagination.
But, arm chair scientists do until the real scientists have the ultimate answer.

Until then, all we have is you.

Now, thats real funny.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 01:59 PM  7 years agoPost 3202
Dusty1000

rrApprentice

Glasgow, U.K.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

""How could you prove to anyone that any one particular event actually took place?""

Dusty, did you actually say that ?? so you agree that there is NO proof the first Cell on Earth made it's self or was made by a Higher Life Form ??
Of course I said that. You quoted my post didn't you?

Scientists don't 'prove', they 'discover'.

Let's look at what I said in context
How could you prove to anyone that any one particular event actually took place? All you can do is present the evidence, and if someone chooses to believe that it's all been fabricated, there's not much we can do to help them understand.
Think of an evolutionary scientist as a murder detective at the scene of a crime, after the event. The job is not to prove that any one individual carried out the crime, but rather to discover who the individual who carried out the crime is. A murder detective would take into account all of the available evidence, perhaps including studying the bullet in a lab, tracing the murder weapon, and tracing the individual who owns it so that further forensic examination might be carried out to show that he was at the scene of the crime at the time.

None of this 'proves' that the individual carried out the murder, it's just evidence. Just like a big jigsaw where all the pieces fit. If one piece didn't fit, such as the suspect had an alibi to say he was elsewhere, the case wouldn't be quite so clear cut. 'Proof' is up to the courts to decide.

Likewise, an evolutionary scientists studying the origins of man takes account of all of the available evidence, carries out tests in a lab, to date fossils etc, which then serve as evidence to show that man evolved from simpler lifeforms. Why do these fossils count as evidence? Because they all fit into place in the big jigsaw, i.e. the fossils of more primitive creatures are older, fossils of more advanced lifeforms are newer. If one fossil didn't fit, for example a fossil of a primitive creature was found to be younger than the fossil of a more advanced lifeform, then evolution of man would not be such a clear cut case. But because out of all of the millions of fossils that have been found, every single one fits into the jigsaw where it should, the case for man having evolved from simpler lifeforms is as clear cut as it can be.

The difference is, in science there is no court to decide whether it constitutes as proof or not. What would be the point? As mentioned, scientists aren't out to prove anything, their job is like that of the detective, they arrive at their conclusions based upon evidence, then they present their work.

As it stands, all of the fossil evidence overwhelmingly tells us that man did indeed evolve from simpler lifeforms, and more than that, scientists can trace man's ancestor all the way back to algae, just as the detective could trace the bullet back to where the metal it is made from originally came from, if he so desired.

So, you are correct, there is no 'proof' as to where the first single cell lifeforms came from, only overwhelming evidence, and no evidence to suggest that it came from elsewhere.

If you have any alternative suggestions though, please do fire away. We're all ears

Dusty

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 02:16 PM  7 years agoPost 3203
Dusty1000

rrApprentice

Glasgow, U.K.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

But, arm chair scientists do until the real scientists have the ultimate answer.
We are all sitting in 'armchairs' when we are on the internet. The term ''armchair scientist'' seems needlessly insulting to me. I suppose I could call you an ''armchair I don't know'', but I do not believe in being intentionally insulting for the sake of it.

Some folk use their time on the internet to learn, and to share with others what we have learned, while others don't.

Why do you deem those that learn and share what they have learned, to be worthy of derision?

If you have some problem with any individual poster, I would appreciate it if you would direct your insults a little more directly.

Thank you

Dusty

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 02:37 PM  7 years agoPost 3204
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Why do you deem those that learn and share what they have learned, to be worthy of derision?
Depends on their derision towards me.
If you have some problem with any individual poster, I would appreciate it if you would direct your insults a little more directly.
I don't recall using the "arm chair scientist" thing on you specifically. If I have, I will refrain from doing so in the future as much as possible.

I think you are aware of who that is directed at for the most part, and its pretty mild as compared to what we have seen. Its just my version of kinder and gentler.

Thank you

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 02:48 PM  7 years agoPost 3205
Dusty1000

rrApprentice

Glasgow, U.K.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I don't recall using the "arm chair scientist" thing on you specifically.
I don't recall you using the term to describe anyone specifically, as you use it in it's plural form.
I think you are aware of who that is directed at for the most part
Of course I am. Perhaps it would make sense to avoid plural forms of any such insults.

Dusty

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 02:50 PM  7 years agoPost 3206
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Of course I am. Perhaps it would make sense to avoid plural forms of any such insults.
In a bad mood this morning Dusty?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 05:27 PM  7 years agoPost 3207
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

he attacks me so heres a handfull of how biblical fiction started enjoy.

whats the old saying if you live in a glass house??

here is the real story how genesis got its story of adam and eve

stolen from sumerian adamu

http://www.mega.nu/ampp/eden/roots.html

Adamu” is the name in Sumerian mythology for the first man, created by “Enki”, the creator god and inventor of civilization. Adam is Hebrew for “man”, and adamah is a Hebrew word signifying dust and earth, and in Aramaic signifying blood. Havva — Hebrew for “Eve” — in Hebrew signifies life.
In the Sumerian myth, magical food is the source of immortality, not the source of its downfall, and Adamu is tricked to not eat it (the gods tell him it is poisonous), and thereby remains mortal. The Hebrew biblical account also describes such a life-giving magical food — the food of the “tree of life”, distinct from the forbidden “tree of knowledge of good and evil” — and it is chiefly to deprive them of the immortality bestowed by the fruit of the tree of life, that God exiles Adam and Eve from the garden. The tale of Cain and Abel (Genesis 4:1-16) parallels tales in Sumerian mythology of rivalries between farmer and herder gods.
Genesis 11:26-31 and 17:5-8 teach that Abraham himself, vaunted father of nations, is a native of the Sumerian city Ur (southeast Iraq, near the ancient mouths of the Tigris and Euphrates) under Chaldean suzerainty, growing up there some time in the second millenium BCE, and departing for Canaan (Israel and environs). Abraham's father Terah adhered to the Sumerian mythology, and was a maker and seller of idols, but Abraham rejected polytheism and his father's idols, and managed a remarkable escape from the Chaldean king's sentence of death for his heresy. Joshua 24:2 records the break: “And Joshua said unto all the people, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood in old time, even Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Nachor: and they served other gods.” In any case, the similarity of the Torah's cosmogony to the Sumerian epic may be evidence that the biblical tales of Abraham are at least partially historical.
Monotheism was first consolidated in the nation of Judah by King Josiah (reigned ca. 641-609 BCE). But soon thereafter, the Chaldeans sacked Jerusalem and forced the Hebrews into exile in Babylon (597-538 BCE), under king Nebuchadrezzar II (605-562 BCE) and his successors. This captivity culminated in the syncretion of proto-Judaism with the Zoroastrianism of their Persian liberator, and the commitment of the Torah to writing. Zoroastrianism, founded ca. 750 BCE, is incidentally but one representative of the descendents of a common prehistoric Indo-European religion; among the other representative mythologies are Hindu, Norse, Greek, and Roman. Zoroastrianism contributes to the Eden myth the very word “paradise”, deriving from the Avestan (Old Persian) pairidaēza. This was the term used in Zoroastrian Persia to refer to the king's enclosed garden parks. The Hebrew in Genesis 2:8 for “garden of Eden” is gan-be'Eden — gan signifies not just a garden, but a walled garden, and Eden is not just a proper name, but a Hebrew term for “delight”. The garden motif even draws direct inspiration from Nebuchadrezzar II, who (according to legend) built “hanging gardens” in Babylon to please his homesick wife Amyitis, daughter of Median king Cyaxares (625-585 BCE). The Medes commanded a vast and verdant pre-Persian, partly Zoroastrian empire east of Chaldea, and the marriage cemented an alliance of the two empires. In fact the Old Persian pairidaēza is believed to have its root in the Mede language, which was in any case quite similar to Old Persian and the other Indo-Iranian languages of the region.
It seems inescapable that, to arrive at the creation mythology articulated by the postexilic authors of Genesis, the Hebrews conflated their ancestral Sumerian cosmogony and cultural inheritance, tales of the Zoroastrian king's idyllic garden in the east, and the Zoroastrian doctrine that the world created by Ahura Mazda was a paradise, spoiled by the evil Ahriman, but to be restored to its paradisiacal condition in the eschaton, as prophesied by Zoroaster. Before this syncretion, neither Satan nor the divine messiah (nor a great many other key doctrines) existed in the Judaic canon — all supernatural acts and promises were attributed directly to the covenant god Yahweh (or, before Josiah's monotheistic edicts, to any number of gods in a heterodox pantheon).

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 05:40 PM  7 years agoPost 3208
Dusty1000

rrApprentice

Glasgow, U.K.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

In a bad mood this morning Dusty?
No. Besides, it was 2:48 PM when I posted the post you refer to

Although we are clear that your ''armchair scientists'' comment was not directed at me specifically, it's also quite clear that you are referring to more than one person.

If it is your intention to insult only one person, does it not make sense to refer to ''armchair scientist'' rather than use the plural of the term?

And why does mention of such indicate to you that I might be having a ''bad morning''?

I thought I went about this in a polite and pleasant manner. How else would you suggest I might have brought the matter to your attention?

Dusty

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 05:43 PM  7 years agoPost 3209
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I thought I went about this in a polite and pleasant manner. How else would you suggest I might have brought the matter to your attention?
Geez Dusty.

Just kidding with you.

Lighten up man.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 05:48 PM  7 years agoPost 3210
Dusty1000

rrApprentice

Glasgow, U.K.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Geez Dusty.

Just kidding with you.

Lighten up man.
here is the real story how genesis got its story of adam and eve
Excellent. That ought to cheer Dennis up.

Dusty

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 05:50 PM  7 years agoPost 3211
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Excellent. That ought to cheer Dennis up.
Yeah sure.

It just gives me a warm cozy feeling all over.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 08:28 PM  7 years agoPost 3212
RCHSF

rrKey Veteran

NC

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Why other stories and religions appear to be older than the bible, that we claim is the oldest true religion.

Lets say that the Creation account in the bible was completely true and literal. Everything happened exactly how it is worded in scripture.

Now imagine that a couple thousand years went by and there has never been a written record of how it happened.

The story of the creation of the world has been passed from generation to generation and culture to culture by word of mouth alone.

Naturally there would be changes to the story from culture to culture. Based on who passed the story and how they told it, it would gradually change.

However, many similarities would remain intact when comparing story to story from different cultures, since they all originated from one true origin.

Then, finally God reveals the true story to Moses of how it actually happened so to be written in the the Torah/Old Testament and preserved for ever.

He gives him an actual retelling of how creation and the origins of man occurred.

The account given to Moses would most likely resemble the stories of ancient cultures throughout the world (for instance, almost every culture has a flood story, and many creation stories have striking parallels). It would resemble them because many were rooted in the truth of that original account, altered from translation to translation and so on.

This would explain why the Torah/Old Testament resembles some "older" creation stories. The stories aren't actually older, they were just written down earlier. And they were retelling of the true creation account (later revealed to Moses) that had gone through so many generations of retelling that they seemed to be completely different stories with only similarities to the Bible story. But the Torah itself tells the original the way it happen.

But no matter how we try to give account, or explain what we believe and how. It will never be good enough for Those who can't find anything better to do than bash. My stuff is better than yours attitude. I know a lot of people like this, most of them are here on this forum. These types will never have any real peace, or happiness. Because they are filled with rage and hate for their fellow man.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 09:53 PM  7 years agoPost 3213
DougsRC

rrProfessor

Mass.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

God created "time" just so everything doesn't happen all at once

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 10:13 PM  7 years agoPost 3214
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You know. Scientists have not even figured out a lot of the complexities of the human brain yet. Nor, have we come even close to match the thinking power in all its complexities yet. Nor, is it projected any time in the future to even come close.

And, thats something tangible they can put their fingers on.

Not that they should stop trying.

But, at least to me, thats another danged good reason to consider Intelligent Design.

Just sayin

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 11:16 PM  7 years agoPost 3215
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The account given to Moses would most likely resemble the stories of ancient cultures throughout the world (for instance, almost every culture has a flood story, and many creation stories have striking parallels). It would resemble them because many were rooted in the truth of that original account, altered from translation to translation and so on.
moses didnt write genesis, moses wasnt atributed as the author until the greko roman period roughly 500ad.

we know for a fact there are 5 different authors.

moses died 300-500 years before man even started writing on something other then rock and its not positive he even existed.

noahs flood is the sumerian flood of 2900BC the sumerians were pagans and had many gods.

in case you didnt know the jews and jesus on the OT and NT used many pagan rituals and storys.

dec 25 was a pagan holiday long before jesus was givin that date.

you need to understand the OT is fiction and the jews even tell you that.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 11:24 PM  7 years agoPost 3216
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I can show facts and evidence all day long and have the pope himself backing my side.

You only have imagination and want.

You do have more anger and hatered then I have.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 11:28 PM  7 years agoPost 3217
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You know. Scientists have not even figured out a lot of the complexities of the human brain yet. Nor, have we come even close to match the thinking power in all its complexities yet. Nor, is it projected any time in the future to even come close.
again, what they do not know is not evidence of ID

we cant figure all of nature out. nature is complicated. Doesnt mean we use our imaginations to fill in the blanks.

Look at what they do know about the brain, look at what they know about the eye and yet ID people try and clain its to complex to evolve yet it has and we have a clear trail of its evolution.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
01-13-2011 11:55 PM  7 years agoPost 3218
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

we cant figure all of nature out. nature is complicated. Doesnt mean we use our imaginations to fill in the blanks.
I will only respond to you to point out your failings outhouse.

I no longer debate or discuss things with God Hating Arm Chair Scientists.

Hate is irrational. Therefore useless to anyone.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-14-2011 12:05 AM  7 years agoPost 3219
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I will only respond
you only respond with hate yourself and no evidence at all ever.

I dont hate anything, i think religion in the past has been barbaric and continues to keep the masses stupid with creationist ideas that are fighting science.

creation fights science, science does not fight religion so I have no problem picking up where they left off for the betterment of humanity.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
01-14-2011 12:09 AM  7 years agoPost 3220
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I dont hate anything, i think religion in the past has been barbaric and continues to keep the masses stupid with creationist ideas that are fighting science.
You don't hate anything ????

Would you call this a love affair?:

outhouse: 0/23/2010 - 145th page

GOD as written is a filthy murdering terrorist guilty of the worst crimes humans can phathom, but only if you believe in the bible.

The story of Noah, god murders almost every living thing on the planet IF YOU BELIEVE!

god MURDERS!

INNOCENT CHILDREN!
INNOCENT ANIMALS!
INNOCENT MEN!
INNOCENT WOMEN!
INNOCENT SEA CREATURES
INNOCENT FRESH WATER SPECIES

Not just a few he flat out murders everyone!!!! he is not a kind god! he is a filthy terrorist who has got away with murder without punishment!

NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lets ignore the fact that there is no geological proof of a global flood unless you have the education of a 3rd grader. FACT

lets ignore the FACT that we have a clear trail of homosapiens leaving africa 200,000 years ago. there was never once a break in genealogy indicating a global flood by a mass murderer. It also shows how man split by enviroment only, evolved into the different races we have today, without a gap.

lets ignore the bible puts noah as a caucasion and according to the bible all the different races in less then 6000 year evolved as we know them.

lets ignore where the water went

lets ignore where the water came from

lets ignore that all animals and man would now be inbreed

LETS IGNORE REALITY!!!! LETS ALL BELIEVE IN THE WORST FILTHY MASS MURDERER TO HAVE EVER MURDERED IN MANKIND!!

BUT only if you belive in the bible.

The above, is a God Hater. That would be you outhouse.

creation fights science, science does not fight religion so I have no problem picking up where they left off for the betterment of humanity.
Speaking for myself, I do not fight science and only encourage science to move forward. But, science needs to stay away from arm chair scientist God Haters like yourself.
you only respond with hate yourself and no evidence at all ever.
Never claimed to have evidence. I have said from the beginning of this thread that:

Nobody knows

I only have evidence of my faith and thats all I need.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
WATCH
 711 pages [ <<    <     160     ( 161 )     162     NEXT    >> ] 320505 views TOPIC CLOSED
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › God Did Create Mankind.
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 30  Topic Subscribe

Wednesday, July 18 - 10:08 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online