More evolutionary lies.

[Tikker]

just curious but did Noah put dinosaurs on that boat too or what's the deal with them?

For creationists were they co-existing with humans?

Does the theory of evolution scare the bible believers because it would prove that man wasn't always the center of the universe, let alone the "ruler" of this world.

depending on which religion you talk to, there's lots of different answers


Some believe the world is 6000ish years old exactly, and that anything older than that was put there by god as a test of faith


some believe that world being created in 6 days, is a metaphor, and not literal and that god bit by bit built up the worlds population


some believe that god supplied the spark, and that the scientific rules he set forth are what's lead us to the point we're at now


some believe that the current world is just a dream, and that when you wake you'll be with god




all of them have about equal merit and evidence

[Ganzo]

If God did it, He could make it look 4.5 billion years old, but that sort of poses some basic questions of theology that make it a problem for most Christian groups, since it means God basically set out to deceive people (I've posted the quote from the Bible telling us to 'study the Earth', before...), which runs against most schools of theology.
--R.

Or it could be that instead of seting out to deceive anyone, God gave free will. If you had concrete evidence it would not be faith, and everyone would be forced to believe. Perhaps God wants you to believe without proof, unconditionaly

This is the exact reasoning that makes arguing against creation impossible. A creationist can answer every single question with "That was gods plan". You can show hard scientific proof of macro evolution and creationist can still come back and say "God put that evidence there to test you".

People who truely with all their heart beleive in creation can never truely accept evolution becasue they believe that god created man and anything science shows against it is either flat out wrong or was put there by god to test our faith in him.

but that is why you can't build arguments of knowlege against faith

you can have both, for some reason people without faith cannot grasp that it does not mater what you tell me, if i have faith, it's big enough to accept all the knowlege and facts you throw at me, and make it part of it.


As far as this specific quote:

If God did it, He could make it look 4.5 billion years old, but that sort of poses some basic questions of theology that make it a problem for most Christian groups, since it means God basically set out to deceive people (I've posted the quote from the Bible telling us to 'study the Earth', before...), which runs against most schools of theology.
--R.

Or it could be that instead of seting out to deceive anyone, God gave free will. If you had concrete evidence it would not be faith, and everyone would be forced to believe. Perhaps God wants you to believe without proof, unconditionaly

I know you do not see it, but the question asked was not scientific but theological. Rust did not ask what happened, but "why did God do it?" question. This question will always receive theological answer

[Gidan]

Oh I dont disagree that his question was entirely theological and in no way scientific. Was just mentioning that your responce was very similar to the basic responce that most ID people give when confronted with anything that supports evoulution.

[Tikker]

No, you're right

I'll write that one off as my Mindiaism of the day (i didn't read the whole thing, and jumped to the wrong conclusion)

[mofish]

It's Copernicus redux. He was burned at the stake for daring to suggest man wasnt the center of God's universe. How dare he.

Now, evolutionist wackos (omg) dare to suggest that man wasn't some special, separate creation from animals. God's image and all that.

If this were 1400 we'd all be burned at the stake. Thank goodness for the Age of Reason.

[mofish]

it does not mater what you tell me, if i have faith, it's big enough to accept all the knowlege and facts you throw at me, and make it part of it.

Too bad more arent like you Ganz.

[Gidan]

it does not mater what you tell me, if i have faith, it's big enough to accept all the knowlege and facts you throw at me, and make it part of it.

Too bad more arent like you Ganz.

I wish more people were like you also. The people I know who live by their faith comepletely disbelieve in sciene because they see things through a very narrow view of the world. They do not see how evolution and faith work together, all they see is that god created man (adam), anyoen who says differently is doomed to rot in hell.

Faith is one of the greatest things in the world, however when it becomes a blinder not allowing you to see the world it surves only as a negative aspect.

One of Darcler's cousins actually threatened to disown her if she started to practice buddhism.

[Agrajag]

if i have faith, it's big enough to accept all the knowlege and facts you throw at me, and make it part of it.

So, if it was proven, without a doubt, that God didn't exist where would your faith be then?

[Themosticles]

If it was proven w/o a doubt that God does in fact exist, where would your non-faith be then?

[mofish]

We'd all be believers. But since that can't happen, no need to worry. Wouldnt proof of God's existence render the whole christian faith doctrine incorrect?

[Agrajag]

I love it when people answer a question with a question, thus avoiding the answer themselves.

If it was proven without a doubt that God exists, then I would have to give up my secret identity and start being held accountible for the state this Earth is in


Ooops! Damn it!

[Gidan]

If it was proven w/o a doubt that God does in fact exist, where would your non-faith be then?

Being as its not possible to be proven its not much an issue. But it it were possible, it would still be nom-faith, it would be knowlege based on evidence.

[Themosticles]

Don't missunderstand the point. The pathetic attempt that started the exchange is the issue. A stupid "What if" question was asked so that if you were in a "believers" position and answered it, your life long beliefs would be trashed and thus you'd have been "put in your place." All I did was turn it around on the person who asked it.

It works both ways.

[Tikker]

If it was proven w/o a doubt that God does in fact exist, where would your non-faith be then?

when you PROVE a god exists, faith doesn't exist, if that makes sense

you know he's there, so you don't have to have faith

[Themosticles]

So, if it was proven, without a doubt, that God didn't exist where would your faith be then?

This was the orginal question...

Obviously using your LITERAL understanding of the question we ALREADY know the answer. However, once again, that was not the point of this stupid question and you know it.

[Eziekial]

Agrajag posted the question. He was digging for it.

[Agrajag]

Obviously using your LITERAL understanding of the question we ALREADY know the answer.

This question was asked to all the people who have "faith." There was no hidden agenda to it. I was only asking the question to find out someone's possible reactions to finding out that, hypothetically, everything they believed and based their life on was wrong.

As I slightly suspected people blew it out of proportion. And of coarse, it was the people who have "faith."

Why not just try answering the question instead of dodging it and calling it stupid? I don't know the answer, that's why I asked the question.

[Themosticles]

Actually I was the only one who responded and I'm not your poster child of "faith."

The premiss, as I SAW IT, was that if it were somehow proven that God does NOT exist, w/o doubt, that people of faith would be lost because their belief system would be turned on its head.

With that line of thinking in mind it is obvious, TO ME (and perhaps only me), that the question could be reversed and thus placing the "past non-believers" point of view on its head.

As Ez implied above, I believe you were fishing. If that wasn't your intent so be it. Perhaps this is a lesson in clarity...for BOTH of us.

[Tikker]

I don't see what the big deal is


If you prove to me(or any other athiest) that god exists, and has power over your eternal soul, you pretty much have to play by his rules, or accept the consequences

[Themosticles]

I don't see what the big deal is


If you prove to me(or any other athiest) that god exists, and has power over your eternal soul, you pretty much have to play by his rules, or accept the consequences

Its not a big deal to those in the middle.

If you are strict athiest then you believe 100% with everything you do, say, and think, that God does not exist. If then tomorrow you woke up and "had to play by his rules" b/c it was proven that he does in fact exist, your understanding of the world around you would be completely flipped on its head. How is that so hard to understand? I'm not commenting on the good or bad of it and there wasn't anything to my original reply that implied that until you continued to disect it looking for shit that isn't there.

ONCE AGAIN, the premis of the original question was, how would you feel if your belief system was proven totally wrong overnight. Why is it so hard to see that? If Agraj is so interested in the answers of others from one side of the question then he should have no trouble answering the question posed to him from his perspective.

I contend he wasn't really interested in the answer but in what he could do with any new found ammunition but that's just my observation.

[Gidan]

I don't see what the big deal is


If you prove to me(or any other athiest) that god exists, and has power over your eternal soul, you pretty much have to play by his rules, or accept the consequences

Its not a big deal to those in the middle.

If you are strict athiest then you believe 100% with everything you do, say, and think, that God does not exist. If then tomorrow you woke up and "had to play by his rules" b/c it was proven that he does in fact exist, your understanding of the world around you would be completely flipped on its head. How is that so hard to understand? I'm not commenting on the good or bad of it and there wasn't anything to my original reply that implied that until you continued to disect it looking for shit that isn't there.

ONCE AGAIN, the premis of the original question was, how would you feel if your belief system was proven totally wrong overnight. Why is it so hard to see that? If Agraj is so interested in the answers of others from one side of the question then he should have no trouble answering the question posed to him from his perspective.

I contend he wasn't really interested in the answer but in what he could do with any new found ammunition but that's just my observation.

The thing is, if you were to prove 100% beyond any doubt that God did exist. The true Athiest would not believe it because they do not believe that god exists so therefor it must be false. The same would hold true with the other extreme. If you proved 100% the God did not exist, they woudl not believe it because they have faith that he does exist and would probably respond with somethign like "That proof was placed there by god to test your faith".

When you come down to it. Pure faith on both extremes would hold regardless. Either complete faith in God or complete faith in the lack of a God.

[Tikker]

what?

that didn't make any sense

if you PROVE god exists (ie, you show up at my door, turn my drinking water to wine, show me the future and the past blah blah blah) why in the world would I reject that?


that'd be like if you showed up in my car, and handed me a sports almanac from the future, and tuned into a football game and showed it predicted the right scores

I'd have to belive you were from the future (and get rich quick omg. although I'd like to think I'd buy a better trophy wife than Leah saggy eye what's her name)

[Gidan]

what?

that didn't make any sense

if you PROVE god exists (ie, you show up at my door, turn my drinking water to wine, show me the future and the past blah blah blah) why in the world would I reject that?


that'd be like if you showed up in my car, and handed me a sports almanac from the future, and tuned into a football game and showed it predicted the right scores

I'd have to belive you were from the future (and get rich quick omg. although I'd like to think I'd buy a better trophy wife than Leah saggy eye what's her name)

If you are a true athiest, you would reject the fact that it was god because to you god does not exist. If god does not exist then this can not possible be god at yoru from door, there must be some other explanation for it.

If you do accept that it is god, then your not an extreme Athiest. When presented with facts you are willing to weight them against your personal beliefs and if the facts show you to be wrong, you are willing to change your beliefs. Extremes tend not to be willing to change their beliefs regadless of the facts that are presented to them simply becasue they honestly believe that they are right therefor your facts must be wrong.

A true Athiest believes 100% that there is no God, even when presented with evidence, they would conclude that the evidence must be wrong because they truely beleive god doesn't exist.

If you can say that you would change your view on the existance of God when new information became available to you, then a small part of you must think that it could be possible that their could be a god.

I ask you this. If you are so confident in your assertion that there could not be a god, no way no how. How is it possible for you to accept any proof that there is a god? If you truely believed god doesn't exist, you would have to come to the conclusion that the exidence of God is wrong.

[alezrik]

based on the way God has shown in the bible he exists. Great Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, Angel of death I doubt we'd enjoy having that proof.

[Narrock]

Flood? What flood? Just blame all the fossilized clam shells and other fossilized sea creatures that are found thousands of feet high on mountains on plate tectonics and continental drift...