Saying you don't "buy into" creationism is akin to not "buying into" the sun being hot.



lol, se what I did? Just because you say something doean't make it a valid argument. The heat is a fact, evolution is not, nor is creationism.





I said you were close mined because you think that creationist all think "science is just too complicated".





Evolution is a theory, based of of scientific facts. the sun and it's heat is a fact and an observation and can be currently measured and has been measured in the past. So as you said, it is an opinion based on evidence, but it takes faith to believe in something you don't know for a fact, that is what faith is, believing in something that isn't a fact. Sure you have facts to base your opinion on, but ultimatley it takes faith to believe.



You have seen the sun rise in the past so that is a fact, you aren't required faith to believe that. But you are required faith even that it will rise tomorrow. you don't know. Sure if everything continues to work the same, you will be right, but what if some supernova wipes out our whole galaxy, then the sun won't rise. So again, you are using your past obserations and knowledge and science to guess that the sun will rise tomorrow. There is no such thing as fact in the future, stuf can have extremely high probablilities of happening, but you can only have a fact based of the past, or present, not future, futrue requires faith, some more than others...mostly based on probability. But IMO since evolutionism is so highly improbable, it takes great faith to believe in it. This is getting techincal again of the definition of faith, but think about it, can you know with 100% certainty know the future? If not, that it takes faith to believe it will happen right? Faith is required anytime there is an unknown or unprovable occurance, and the future can't be proved until it becomes present, in which case faith is no longer needed. But evolution is unkown or unprovable occurance, though there may be scientific fact to justify some of the theories, it still isn't a fact and requires faith.



Again back to my water in cups test. If you walked into that room saw one half empty and did some calculations (knowing the rate of evaporation) you could give a fact based opinion on how long it has been there.....But would you put $100k bet on it? If you would, you are putting faith into your guess that they have both been there the same amount of time. It takes faith to bet $100k. If it was a known fact, anyone would put up 1 million, because it is a guaranteed win, not a probably win.







Exactly what I have been saying.



If evolution did happen then who started the big bang, or why did it, something had to cause it. That chicken egg rhetoric can be used for either argument. That is why I didn't use it, it is a invalid argument that neither side can answer.







What? I never once said that. I never did say God is for Christians only, nor used the Christian God's name, God is a term used to represent the monotheistic being. Had I been speaking in arabic, I would have said Allah. Correct me if I am wrong, but is it possible to believe in creationism and believe in mulitple gods or lack of one? I am no expert on older religions like the greeks, but do they believe that all of their gods created the world? I even clarified to opposite of what you say, by saying God is the creator/disigner of everything and provider (what creationist believe), and He isn't confined to the Bible or Christianity. And I used designer a few times when explaining creationism on the academic side. The Jew believe in creationsism, so do muslims, many religions do.



Now I did say my personal beliefs that if you seek this creator and provider, He will reveal Himself and His Son to you. But that is my beliefs, I never imposed that on anyone, more of a challenge if anyone wanted to. But I didnt' say go to church or read the Bible (imposing a religion), I said IF you seek God, the creator, He will reveal Himself to you, that is my beliefs. So if you asked me I would say I believe the God the Bible speaks about is the creator, but I never used that in my argument or debate. When debating creationism I used an acedimic and mathematical/probablility argument.





I don't think I imposed it on anyone, I shared my religious beliefs, but I also stated my academic arguments.

I don't think anyone should steroetype when debating, it is igonrant. If you want to joke around with it,it is up to you. But when debating and using a stereotype to make a point or to discredit a debator, you just look ignorant. Anytime a group is used and it's quanity isn't classified, it is inferring all, and it is a stereotype and an ignorant statement and invalid debate point. Notice I classified and said "many athiests", not "all" , or just "atheist".

 

you became part of the imposing christian group the moment you started preaching and quoting the bible in a attempt to prove your point.

 

So everyone can share their faith on theory of evolutoin but I can't share mine? That is a little unfair, though I guess I shouldn't be surprised, public schools do it too and the secular world has been imposing the theory of evolution for some time, people like Dr. Harris claiming it as a fact is one example of imposing ones beliefs on everyone else who disagrees.



I would say claiming evolution to be a fact is rather imposing those beliefs onto other, though I have clearly and intentionaly not done that. Imposing is a word genreally describing "forcebly put in place" like shoving down someones throat. Sharing is not imposing. Though I did delve into Chrsianity a bit was in response to Dr. Harris saying why Christians are 'scared of evolution'. And that is where I used the Bible verse to show that all Christians aren't, and that statement was a sterotype. And the Bible verse I used, had nothing to do with proving any piont in the debate, I was speaking by the book of Christians so explain what Christians (Bible) do believe, to demonstrate that the Bible shouldn't be used as a means of religion rather a means of that verse I quoted. Using the Bible to define Christianity when it is questioned is absolutly legit, and non imposing. That verse nor any part of my religious beliefs were used at all in my debate of evolution vs. creationism. As my only argument against evolutionism is how highly improbable it is, and my argument for creationism was only if your reason for believing in something is bassed on probability.



If I said something about muslims, I would expect someone to quote the Qur'an if they were correcting me, and they wouldn't be imposing any beliefs, rather clarifying a falsification.

 

yes but the fact that you go out of your way to disprove other opinions instead of just allowing others to co-exist with there believes goes to show that you honestly believe yourself to be elite over all non-christians. which is my largest issue with organized religion. I didnt watch harris' video nore do i care to do so i base my opinions on my own interactions with the world. I chose NOT to follow blindly the opinions of others.





no one asked you to prove your believes based on bible passages, yet, you felt the need to





then maybe you should post up a video arguing with dr. harris then







and my only argument is how highly improbable christianity is and my argument that no one knows for sure still stands.





lol a christian talkin to a muslim peacefully good one almost had me there



in closing i would just like to anger you some more with a few more things for you to write long winded, essay style, repetitive paragraphs to prove how elite you are:



jesus wasnt a christian







and ill end this here with a bible verse that has no apparent meaning to this thread just for you



deuteronomy 23: 13

As part of your equipment, you are to have a trowel, and when you squat outside, you are to scrape a hole with it and then turn and cover your excrement.



although that passage has no meaning cuz testament version 2.0 basically deleted all of testament 1.0

 

So I can't enjoy debating? I wouldn't say go out of my way anymore than anyone has in this thread. And the reason for sharing the verse refernce is so that you can look it up for accuracy if you wish, and you know I am not just spouting out my own beliefs.



Have you seen how much I wrote on the actual topic? I don't think I mentioned religion once until post #27, well into responding to others about it. How is that considered "imposing" or "going out of my way" by any means?



Though I really don't debate creationism vs evolutionism, as I said above, no sides will ever be convinced, it is poinless. Though I do beleive that I could convince evolutionist that it takes just as much faith if not more than creationism to belive in and isn't a proven fact, and that is what my debate was based on.



Perhapse I should....







I agree, probability is a horrible argument for why to become a Chrisitan, I would never aruge that. Though I stil think it is WAY more probable than evoultionism. But I agree on your premise that no one knows for sure.





Now you are taking a gun from Dr. Harris' arsonal of debating.... The ol' sarcasm and red herring. That wasn't the point of my comment, my point was to say that any reference to a religious passege is legitimate in a debate if it was questioned in the first place.



And though it is red herring, I will go down this rabbit trail.... There are many Muslims and Christians that get along. Maybe not stereotypical angry Christians or extremist Muslims, but the rest of them do. They all believe in the same God, though much of their beliefs are from being passed onto from man, nto what their scriptures say. Jesus said to them in John 8 "You do not know me or my Father,” Jesus replied. “If you knew me, you would know my Father also.”" "“If God were your Father, you would love me". Basically the Jews at this time were followers of the law more than those who had faith in God, and Jesus says that is why you don't know Me, you don't know My Father. I would say the same to any Muslim, to forget about your holy book and I will forget about mine, it isn't about any book or writings, it is about God, the same God we both believe that created everything and is evident in our daily lives through the majesty of his creations and from the simple things like the sun rising and the complexities of how our heart works everyday and all teh blesseings He has provided for us. I would point a Muslim to that God, and tell them to seek Him first, and see what He doesn't reveal to them. Thats it, you can't get more peacful than that.

Because my personal beliefs (I wouldn't say this to them) is that if you follow the Qua'ran or the Bible rather than traditions of man, they both clearly point to Jesus being the Son of God and person who God sent because He loves us and doens't want us to go to hell. And it is my faith that in seeking God He will reveal His Son to them. This is how people in third world countries know about Jesus. There has been misisonaries who have gone to other countries only to find out these natives didn't know what a Bible was nor have ever heard of Christianity, but they had a relationship with God after seeking Him and God's Son was revealed to them. Seeking God is required to know God, not a Bible or a religion or a pastor.









Why would that anger me, I don't think you have actualy read my posts, rather lumped me in with your stereotype of 'my kind'. I said, and I even used a Bible verse to say



My faith is rooted in God, not the Bible. The same thing I would tell a Muslim, who happens to believe in much of the Bible too, as their Father is Abraham too, like the Jews. If they want to have an acedimic debate, I surely will, but I would never try to convert someone by my own intelligence, or think taht if I could just ocnvince them of X then they will believe. In fact again I said



From an acedemic standpoint, I like to debate, but from a religious stand point, I am a disciple of Jesus (who yes, was a Jew) (as that is what a Christian means, it was a derogatory term for those followers of Jesus) and attempt to share the light of God with men, by reaching out, meeting the needs of them, relating to them, and telling them about that hope that I have and they can too if they want. If they don't, that is there choice, they have free will, I will move on. If God gave them free will to choose, who am I to force them or trick them or try to convince them to do anything, I am just there passivly like a light, I am showing what it looks like, if you want it, awesome! if not, ok, I respect your beliefs. My faith is to do exactly what Jesus did, and have faith in my Father, that He will act on the hearts of men, He will bring them to salvation, I am just a tool being used, I can't save or convince anyone to get saved.



I don't think you get it at all. I am not trying to prove how elite I am, I know I am not. I wish for all to have true joy, I know people are hurting out there, and the best way is the meet their needs and realate to them, and allow them to see the light and ask me about it, rather than me shoving it down their throat, again, just like Jesus did. So that was not my intentions at all. Again, my first intentions were to debate on the OP topic, and I did. I happened to use a quote said and used it against a speaker to discredit them. Then a whole hornetes nest was stirred, I continued to acedimically debate the OP debate and the evolution one. It wasn't till much further in that religion came into play and I guess I got sucked in with my debate mode, but I am truely sorry if that offended you or you took it the wrong way, again, I would never intend to debate my faith with intentions of converting anyone.



As far as your comment "although that passage has no meaning cuz testament version 2.0 basically deleted all of testament 1.0" again, since you are speaking of the Bible, I might use it to fix a falsehood. Though it being such a lengthy topic, I will refrain from using verses unless you request one of me to prove my point. But the old testiment was written as a guidline for the Jews. The Jews were God's chosen people via a covenent with Abraham, who had Isaac, who had, Jacob (renamed Isreal) who had 12 sons who became the 12 tribes of Isreal and Judah was one of the tribes which later on Jew came from, though Isrealite is probably a more proper term. though for simplicity sake I will stick with Jews. They Jews were told to kill their own people if they commited homosexuality, as it could infect the entire nation. They also had ceremonial cleansing...basically wash your hand before you eat, something God was helping primitive man out with so they are protected from germs, the same with barrying your crap (Deut 20:13) as you stated, or stuff beig unclean. No matter what the law was, it was in essence to protect the Jews. Abraham was credited as righteous because of his faith with God, it was and always will be about faith with God, and these laws were a guide to help with your faith. Well, a lot fo stuff happened and the pharasees and sauducess (kind of like preist of the JEwish) decided there was no longer a need for sacrificing and many of the laws of old. Though the 10 commandments were still in place. Well, the Jews started to make the religion a little too religious, it became about following the traditions and the laws of man and less and less about God and faith in Him and having a personal relationship with Him, which is the whole purpose God created us for. Jesus then came along, and demonstrated how we should live, and said whe Jesus was questioned He said "27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b]”" If you look at the 10 commandments, and all the laws of the OT, they worked in acoordance with these to, so that these two could be done more completly. It was never about laws, it was always supposed to be about God. Jesus even yelled at and condemned the so called religous folk who peverted Juduasm. Though Jesus ate and drank with the prostitutes and tax payers (white collor criminals of that time) and healed them, he met their needs, related ot them, and showed them the light of God, and many asked about this hope, and they were saved. Many others didn't and weren't. That is really the summary of the Bible, it is such a simple thing, and the rest of it is help us accomplish that. Though unfortunatly, many Christians did/do the same thing that the pharasees and saducees did in that time and seem to forget about God and rely more on the Bible and its laws and rules and do the very opposite of what Jesus did, which according to the Bible really isn't even a Christian, as a Christian is a disciple of Jesus, not a follwer of certain passeges of the Bible.



So no versions 2.0 and 1.0 (ie the OT and NT) are exaclty the same in premise, it is just a few details were different to go with the different times. But the OT is still a great book and can help grow Christians closet to God to follow the first greatest commandment that Jesus said, and the second.



In regard for you attempting to stir my anger...

Proverbs 14:27 Whoever is patient has great understanding,

but one who is quick-tempered displays folly.



James 1:19-20 19 My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, 20 because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires.



Proverbs 15:1 A gentle answer turns away wrath,

but a harsh word stirs up anger.



An example too of the OT and NT being fully needed and not replaced at all.



I do my best not to get angry, but not so that I can follow some rule or law, but to glorify my Heavenly Father. God has blessed me with many trials in life whic has strengthened me and allowed me to be quite patneint and not get angry easily. You probably won't find me using any insults or profanity or caps lock lol.







If you or anyone has any more quesitons I would be more than glad to give them answer to the Bible or more importantly for the reason for the hope that I have. But all that 'religous stuff' above was with the intentions to educate you from an academic standpoint of the purpose of the Bible and what it says so you no longer can say 2.0 replaced 1.0. or other falsehoods.

 

No time to read all of this right now. From scanning through it appears to be civil enough for the time being. I just wanted to remind people to keep it civil. Regardless of our difference of opinions on these subjects those opinions don't define us and we have enough in common to still get along and enjoy our corner of the internet.



I'm not perfect in the being civil department myself, but I'm going to work on that. This is a very interesting debate and I would like to see it continue if it can stay civil.

 

Alright alright ill keep out of it then....back to trolling other posts

 

As I've said previously... There is no changing peoples minds when it comes to politics and religion. This is why I'm keeping my posts short. Not really worth the effort to type for 15-20 minutes to respond.