Originally posted by sithsaber408Good grief. Why do so many religious people on this forum seem like they were homeschooled by retards. Were they actually all homeschooled by retards?
Back on topic:"Did dinos soar? Imaginations certainly took flight over "Archaeoraptor Liaoningesis", a birdlike fossil with a meat-eater's tail that was spirited out of northeastern China, 'discovered' at a Tucson, Arizona, gem and mineral show in '99, and displayed at the National Geographic Society in Washington, D.C. Some 110,000 visitors saw the exhibit, which closed January 17th; millions more read about the find in November's National Geographic. Now, paleontologists are eating crow. Instead of 'a true missing link' connecting dinosaurs to birds, the specimen appears to be a composite, its unnusual appendage likely tacked on by a Chinese farmer, not evolution.
"Archaeoraptor is hardly the first 'missing link' to snap under scrutiny. In 1912, fossil remains of an ancient hominid were found in England's Piltdown quarries and quickly dubbed man's ape-like ancestor. It took decades to reveal the hoax."-U.S. News & World Report, February 14,2000
"Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record."
-Time magazine, Nov. 7,1977
"Charles Dawson, a British lawyer and amateur geologist, announced in 1912 his discovery of pieces of a human skull, and an apelike jaw in a gravel pit near the town of Piltdown, England...Dawson's announcement stopped the scorn cold. Experts instantly declared Piltdown Man (estimated to be 300,000 to one million years old) the evolutionary find of the century. Darwin's missing link had been found.
"Or so it seemed for the next 40 or so years. Then, in the early fifties...scientists began to suspect misattribution. In 1953, that suspcicion gave way to a full-blown scandal: Piltdown Man was a hoax. Radiocarbon tests proved that its skull belonged to a 600-year old woman, and its jaw to a 500-year old orangutan from the West Indies."-Our Times: The Illustrated History of the 20th Century
These are not isolated incedents.
The famed Nebraska Man was derived from a single tooth, which was later found to be from an extinct pig. Java Man, found in the early 20th century, was nothing more than a piece of skull, a fragment of a thigh bone, and three molar teeth. The rest came from the deeply fertile imaginations of plaster of Paris workers. Java Man is now regarded as fully human. Heidelberg Man came from a jawbone, a large chin section, and a few teeth. Most scientists reject the jawbone because its similar to modern man. Still, many evolutionists believe that he's 250,000 years old. No doubt they pinpointed his birthday with carbon dating. However, TIME magazine (June 11, 1990) published a science article subtitled "Geologists show that carbon dating can be way off", in which it is implied that carbon dating is only 100% accurate up to 7,000-10,000 years(the exact amount of time that the earth would be around if the Bible is correct), and even more interestingly, :
"Shells from LIVING snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old" - SCIENCE magazine, vol.224, 1984 (emphasis added 😉 )
The Neanderthal man is no evidence for evolution either. He died of exposure. His skull was exposed as being fully human, not ape. Not only was his stuped posture found to be caused by disease, but he spoke and was artistic and religious.
😎
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Good grief. Why do so many religious people on this forum seem like they were homeschooled by retards. Were they actually all homeschooled by retards?
They just use google and copy paste the first argument they can find on a website, Then add some comment like how right that argument is.. Or in this case.. A dude with glasses....
they can't prove it themselves so they count on some flawed webpage to do the work for them...
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Good grief. Why do so many religious people on this forum seem like they were homeschooled by retards. Were they actually all homeschooled by retards?
Homeschooled by people with such resources as the "Our Times: The Illustrated History of the 20th Century." Now that's scary. Evolutionists better be scared. Snort. Snicker.
And our Christian friends should be careful about loudly proclaiming the falsity of evolution based upon things like the Piltdown man. People might do it back.
Maybe we could mention all those things meant to prove God and Jesus. Shroud of Turin anybody? The box said to contain the bones of Jesus's "brother"? All the pieces of the "True Cross", which if put together would create something hundreds of meters high? The fact back in the 1200's there was something like three, count 'em three, heads all apparently belonging to to John the Baptist? Rusty old spear tips said to be the fabled "spear of destiny" that turn out to be many, many hundreds of years too late? The list goes on, and is far, far larger then any list that could be created from studies of evolution.
there are many problems with the very CONCEPTS of omnipotence/omniscience. if god is omnipotent than he is self sustaining, he neither needs nor wants. but then why would an omnipotent god need OR want to create the world/satan/angels or anythin let alone want people to pray to him. all will is in one way or another related to desire, if u will sumthing to happen or make it happen, its because u either WANT or NEED that thing to happen for whatever reason, but if god was all that there was omnipotent, he would not desire anything else and there would be no reason to create anythin else, even if sum1 does sumthin just for the heck of it, theres still desire behond it n and omnipotent god SHOULD be beyond any desire because there is nuthin MORE than himself, he is all. also the concept of omnipotence is flawed, if a god is all powerful that means that he can do ANYTHING, but anything also includes him being able to create another omnipotent god{for he can do ANYTHING} but if another omnipotent god exists, the very concept of all powerful omnipotence goes down the drain as it is only for ONE not two, secondly an omnipotent god COULD create an even more powerful being than himself{as he is omnipotent} and that also destroyes the concept. another thing an omnipotent god cud also kill himself if he wanted {as he is all powerful} but that too would destroy the concept and above all if he CANT or wont do these things than THAT TOO denies the concept of omnipotence as he would then not be ALL POWERFUL.
theres also a problem with omniscience{the ability to see and know all, past/present/future ad anythin and everythin else, material/spiritual and beyond. an omniscient god would KNOW what lied in his future n what actions he WOULD take but if that was true than the omniscient god would be RESTRICTED to doing only those things which would deny the concept of omnipotence of god. also people say that god has a choice to do whatever he wants n he is not limited{to say that his omniscince is like the thoughts of a human who knows what he is gonna do in the future ashe KNOWS himself, this argument is given to truy n validate god's omnipotence with his omniscience} but if that were true than the prospect of god NOT being SURE about the future would come up as he COULD do anything he wanted, but THAT defies his other aspect OMNISCIENCE, god WOULD know what decisions he was going to make if he truly was omniscient and therefore put limits upon himself which would destroy his omnipotence in any way.
lastly if god is omniscient than man does not have a free will as god knows the path he will choose even IF any choice to the human is given, god KNOWS what the human will do and the human wont do anything other than what god knows, this means that the human is not in control of himself even if he thinks he is and his every single actions is predestined, why ten would god punish any1 n why then is it in almost every relegion that free will exists? lastly if god is all powerful than the world is ALSO a part of god with everythin in it, because nuthing OTHER than god can exist because even though it might be much weaker, anythin OTHER than god would nullify his omnipotence.
these {yea i know they are borin n sumwhat cumbersome to go through} are some of the main reasons i dont believe in ANY relegion with an omnipotent god in it n im 100% sure that no OMNIPOTENT/OMNISCIENT god exists. just hope it opens the eyes of others. the other issues dont even matter when the basic concept behind god is 100% false.
yup ive gone on for too long, hope sum1 goes to the trouble of readin this. n NO i havent gotten these ideas from any1 on anywhere, its just what i have thought up off in the past few years n have been the reason im no longer relegious.
Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Perhaps god wondered as to what his purpose was? and came to the conclusion that his powers were to create... and a universe was born...
if he wondered, he wouldnt be omniscient, if his powers were only to create than hes not omnipotent 😄 {get my point, such a god CAN NOT exist}
Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
I'm not saying thats the limit of his power... But knew that his purpose was to create and generaly do what he wanted...God doesn't have to have a reason... hes all powerful...
Constantly asking why over and over again is dull... Give your solution to the problem then...
sigh, TRY n understand what im sayin. anythin that has a purpose is ALWAYS ULTIMATELY CREATED {its true if u think about it} purpose is decided by a higher power, wheather that be ur firm boss or god. sumthin that has a purpose is confined and has things ASSOCIATED with it sumthin that has a purpose has to have sum1 ELSE or sumthine ELSE outside of it to define that purpose n thus can NOT be omnipotent, sum1 omnipotent has complete freedom, no limitation, motivations, advantages, disadvantages or pressure, nor a purpose, it is complete in itself n nuthin other than it IS{exists} and even if it does, it has to be part of it, IF god has a purpose, than he is not omnipotent. {oh n btw, WITHOUT a reason he wudnt have a purpose n u said urself that he has a purpose n then later went on to say that he doesnt have to have a reason u cant have it both ways} i do have a solution to a problem, it is this, PEOPLE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT AN OMNIPOTENT GOD NEITHER "DOES" NOR "CAN" EXIST.
I got your proof, a Chiwawa. Humans have been playing with the basic building blocks of evolution for centuries. A Chiwawa could never have lived in the wild; we humans have made this animal by selective breading. The dog had the genetic potential to make all the strange dogs we have today. Evolution is nature doing the selective breading instead of humans.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
sigh, TRY n understand what im sayin. anythin that has a purpose is ALWAYS ULTIMATELY CREATED {its true if u think about it} purpose is decided by a higher power, wheather that be ur firm boss or god. sumthin that has a purpose is confined and has things ASSOCIATED with it sumthin that has a purpose has to have sum1 ELSE or sumthine ELSE outside of it to define that purpose n thus can NOT be omnipotent, sum1 omnipotent has complete freedom, no limitation, motivations, advantages, disadvantages or pressure, nor a purpose, it is complete in itself n nuthin other than it IS{exists} and even if it does, it has to be part of it, IF god has a purpose, than he is not omnipotent. {oh n btw, WITHOUT a reason he wudnt have a purpose n u said urself that he has a purpose n then later went on to say that he doesnt have to have a reason u cant have it both ways} i do have a solution to a problem, it is this, PEOPLE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT AN OMNIPOTENT GOD NEITHER "DOES" NOR "CAN" EXIST.
*Sigh* So by your own definition things Must have purpose in order to be... If a thing has no purpose then its purpose is not to have a purpose...
Your whole argument comes from 1 word I used... That gods purpose was to create us... What if god just felt like creating us, Then went back to living his life in the clouds happily doing nothing living without a purpose... Theres many things that get created that don't have a purpose... Such as people... Our purpose is to reproduce to ensure the survival of our species... But why??? We don't get points for it.. Nor do we get any benefit out of in once we die?? and just like that... Your whole argument that we must have a purpose crumbles...
If theres no god then why bother living to get into heaven?? You might as well do what ever you want as there is no purpose??? (while I'm not saying the meaning of life is to get into heaven,I used this as an example...)
Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
*Sigh* So by your own definition things Must have purpose in order to be... If a thing has no purpose then its purpose is not to have a purpose...Your whole argument comes from 1 word I used... That gods purpose was to create us... What if god just felt like creating us, Then went back to living his life in the clouds happily doing nothing living without a purpose... Theres many things that get created that don't have a purpose... Such as people... Our purpose is to reproduce to ensure the survival of our species... But why??? We don't get points for it.. Nor do we get any benefit out of in once we die?? and just like that... Your whole argument that we must have a purpose crumbles...
If theres no god then why bother living to get into heaven?? You might as well do what ever you want as there is no purpose??? (while I'm not saying the meaning of life is to get into heaven,I used this as an example...)
im tired, but ill explain again. im not saying there are things that are without a purpose{however nuthing was CREATED that way} thye only lost their purpose later on. i NEVER said that thing MUST have purpose, just that anything that has purpose was created not the other way around. i was merely making the point that IF god has a purpose then he can NOT be omnipotent.
as far as the "he created us because he felt like it" argument goes, i have a good answer for that. by the very definition of omnipotent, he is self sustaining, he neither NEEDS nor WANTS/DESIRES anything if he does than he is a slave to an emotion, be that NEED{n sum1 who is omnipotent does NOT need anythings} , or be that WANT/DESIRE {sum1 who is omnipotent does not WANT nor desire anything} it is because he is complete into himself and is all powerful, h neither wants nor desires anything other than that therefore he would never FEAL like creating any1 because that would either be out of NEED or DESIRE, NUTHING would be CREATED without those emotions n since those emotions can not be part of sum1 omnipotent, god can NOT have created the world. an omnipotent god atleast.
as for the last part
"If theres no god then why bother living to get into heaven?? You might as well do what ever you want as there is no purpose???"
i wud like u to be VERY clear what ur purpose is in stating that sentence. it looks to me like u cant handle life without a god given purpose and are afraid to "do watever u want as there is no purpose" also is god the only reason why YOU bother to live, i know its certainly not the reason i live, but if u feal that way be my guest and throw urself off a skyscrapper.{although id tell u to not do that 😄 😛 }
Originally posted by leonheartmm
"If theres no god then why bother living to get into heaven?? You might as well do what ever you want as there is no purpose???"i wud like u to be VERY clear what ur purpose is in stating that sentence. it looks to me like u cant handle life without a god given purpose and are afraid to "do watever u want as there is no purpose" also is god the only reason why YOU bother to live, i know its certainly not the reason i live,
The point was that if we god doesn't exist and we won't go to heaven ever. Then we are not bound by any laws other then to do what we want... The choice to act in accordance with the law is so that we can exist in a society. This still doesn't equate as to why we live if we can't do anything other then live for the few short years we have... We might as well do what we want until we die?? After all it won't affect us once we have gone!
I can handle life just fine.. I have no intentions of doing anything crazy I want to have a happy standard life... My question is why don't you do what you want?
Check out the term omnipotent... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotent
God doesn't have to have no power of choice to be omnipotent... He doesn't have to have no free will either... In terms of religion it (literally, "all power"😉 its power with no limits or ever inexhaustible, in other words, unlimited power. He doesn't have to forfeit the right to never use this power as he sees fit... Or the choice of having a purpose... your arguing on the basis of Rejection of omnipotence as a paradoxes of omnipotence is that he can't have the power to "create a stone so heavy that he couldn't lift it himself..." (to that extent...)
Which is a catch 22 situation... I'm not interested in debating round in circles...
Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
I'm not going to disagree but I will elaborate, I was brought up in a strong christian family and went to all religious schools. I never really had much of a choice in my faith and as so, I only really know about 1 well... (Shame really) I wouldn't concider myself to be a strong christian anymore, But I do believe there to be a god. Which God is the correct one??? Who has the best religion? to me the base concepts in mainly are the same (try not to kill, Be a good person....) so I don't think It's really worth changing my religion. If science could prove tomorrow that there was no god (of any kind) and the universe is just 1 science theory away from being explained I would try to accept it over disproving it.For me it feels natural, While I don't expect others to believe on that basis, Its nice to have some faith...
Actually, I meant to address that part to =Mysta=-kILL, my apologies.
Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
The point was that if we god doesn't exist and we won't go to heaven ever. Then we are not bound by any laws other then to do what we want... The choice to act in accordance with the law is so that we can exist in a society. This still doesn't equate as to why we live if we can't do anything other then live for the few short years we have... We might as well do what we want until we die?? After all it won't affect us once we have gone!I can handle life just fine.. I have no intentions of doing anything crazy I want to have a happy standard life... My question is why don't you do what you want?
Check out the term omnipotent... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotent
God doesn't have to have no power of choice to be omnipotent... He doesn't have to have no free will either... In terms of religion it (literally, "all power"😉 its power with no limits or ever inexhaustible, in other words, unlimited power. He doesn't have to forfeit the right to never use this power as he sees fit... Or the choice of having a purpose... your arguing on the basis of Rejection of omnipotence as a paradoxes of omnipotence is that he can't have the power to "create a stone so heavy that he couldn't lift it himself..." (to that extent...)Which is a catch 22 situation... I'm not interested in debating round in circles...
ill answer this in stages{not in order mind u}
"God doesn't have to have no power of choice to be omnipotent... He doesn't have to have no free will either... In terms of religion it (literally, "all power"😉 its power with no limits or ever inexhaustible, in other words, unlimited power. He doesn't have to forfeit the right to never use this power as he sees fit... Or the choice of having a purpose... your arguing on the basis of Rejection of omnipotence as a paradoxes of omnipotence is that he can't have the power to "create a stone so heavy that he couldn't lift it himself..." (to that extent...)
Which is a catch 22 situation... I'm not interested in debating round in circles..."
the definition of omnipotent in a dictionary is at the very best limited, but IF sumthing is omnipotent MANY things and rules AUTOMATICALLY apply, for example, the dictionary just says omnipotent=sum1 with infinite power, or endless power or ALLPOWERFUL. NOW, if that sum1 IS all powerful than that ALSO means that there is only ONE of him, this is because IF there is another one who is ALLPOWERFUL than NEITHER will be ALL powerful, because to be ALL powerful u have to HAVE "ALL" and if even one little thing exist other than those under your power u do not have power over ALL. now that wouldnt be stated in the dictionary but it would impose itself on the definition instantly just like the other things i have said. just because ur not interested in in the CATCH22 situation{as u put it} doesnt mean it doesnt exist. if god has a purpose than that purpose is either dictated by sumthing beyond god or is in itself a concept beyond god both of which deny the conept of omnipotence{all powerful} of god. and also if god really was omnipotent he WOULD be able to create sum1 even more powerful than himself but since that wud deny his omnipotence he wont be ALL powerful, thus the very concept of omnipotence is paradoxical and denies itself. {i hope this clears that up}
now as far as this goes
"The point was that if we god doesn't exist and we won't go to heaven ever. Then we are not bound by any laws other then to do what we want... The choice to act in accordance with the law is so that we can exist in a society. This still doesn't equate as to why we live if we can't do anything other then live for the few short years we have... We might as well do what we want until we die?? After all it won't affect us once we have gone!
I can handle life just fine.. I have no intentions of doing anything crazy I want to have a happy standard life... My question is why don't you do what you want?"
i can explain this easily. the first paragraph isnt really a question{if u read it carefully urself} it is just u sayin in a way that its impossible to handle the concept of there being no god. it seems that life without a god given purpose, rules and reward is impossible to imagine.
"This still doesn't equate as to why we live if we can't do anything other then live for the few short years we have... We might as well do what we want until we die?? After all it won't affect us once we have gone!"
sadly this is probably the case, no matter how hard to accept.{again see as that statement was expressing more fear if my version of events is true, than giving me a question to answer and debate over.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
if god has a purpose than that purpose is either dictated by sumthing beyond god or is in itself a concept beyond god both of which deny the conept of omnipotence{all powerful} of god. and also if god really was omnipotent he WOULD be able to create sum1 even more powerful than himself but since that wud deny his omnipotence he wont be ALL powerful, thus the very concept of omnipotence is paradoxical and denies itself. {i hope this clears that up}
now as far as this goesi can explain this easily. the first paragraph isnt really a question{if u read it carefully urself} it is just u sayin in a way that its impossible to handle the concept of there being no god. it seems that life without a god given purpose, rules and reward is impossible to imagine.
sadly this is probably the case, no matter how hard to accept.{again see as that statement was expressing more fear if my version of events is true, than giving me a question to answer and debate over.
Your trying to put god in a box... Now by "our" definition that is impossible for the paradoxes that occur... Just like a mouse can't comprehend us... We can not comprehend god or his powers... We assign the term omnipotent to the fact that he could do anything... And is not bound by the laws of logic (like us) or reasoning (like our debate) the fact is that if god wanted to create a square circle he could.. But by definition to us, He couldn't... That is the true power of god... He is beyond reasoning and logic... There is no point in trying to engage in paradox debates....
While It would be nice to have an after life, This affects me very little... My point was concering your view... If people have a purpose then they will act within reason to achieve that purpose.. if they have no purpose then they can do whatever they want...
Have we assigned ourselfs our own purpose? (survive and have kids) or are we trying to achieve someone elses purpose...
Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Your trying to put god in a box... Now by "our" definition that is impossible for the paradoxes that occur... Just like a mouse can't comprehend us... We can not comprehend god or his powers... We assign the term omnipotent to the fact that he could do anything... And is not bound by the laws of logic (like us) or reasoning (like our debate) the fact is that if god wanted to create a square circle he could.. But by definition to us, He couldn't... That is the true power of god... He is beyond reasoning and logic... There is no point in trying to engage in paradox debates....While It would be nice to have an after life, This affects me very little... My point was concering your view... If people have a purpose then they will act within reason to achieve that purpose.. if they have no purpose then they can do whatever they want...
Have we assigned ourselfs our own purpose? (survive and have kids) or are we trying to achieve someone elses purpose...
so ur counterargument is that my argument{a concept which is BASED on logic} is wrong simply because god is beyond logic and nuthin can be said or proven or given to make it otherwise? no matter how logical/reasonable/believeable?