Welcome to TruthTalkLive.com!

Today’s Issues, From a Biblical Perspective!

Can you follow God & Darwin?

Posted by truthtalklive on July 23, 2008

On todays show Stu will be talking about Transitional Life Forms. Stu will have two guest today one from The Discovery Institute by the name of Casey Luskin and the other is Bob Griffin discussing evolution and how to doubt Darwin using his own theory. You can contact them through his email at inference@triad.rr.com. As always thanks for listening!!!!

You can listen to the podcast after the show by clicking!

www.wtru.com

Advertisements

367 Responses to “Can you follow God & Darwin?”

  1. Barney said

    Take two slices of wheat bread, lightly toasted and prepare them with light mayonnaise and mustard. Add lettuce and thin slices of garden tomatoes if you like. Then set them aside on a paper plate with potato chips.

    Heat a non-stick skillet to medium heat and add two slices of quality all-beef bologna. As the Bologna slices begin to cook, for approximately three minutes, carefully cut a side of each slice to help keep the slices flat. Flip the slices over and cook for another two to three minutes. Remove and place on the prepared sandwich halves.

    Add the soft drink (or Iced Tea for us Southerners) beverage of your choice and enjoy your Famous Baloney Sandwich!

    I can almost smell them cooking now!

  2. BOZO bozarth said

    Here we go again… 😦

    I’m a young-earth creationist. Will defend the Biblical account of creation till my last breath….but..how many shows do we need on it?

    There are a host of other topics that Truthtalklive hasn’t ventured into yet.

    One would be the “church of Christ” aka Campbellites that are becoming strong and very vocal in the triad area. They go to local denominational churches trying to get any and every pastor to come on their show and debate. Pelagianism and baptismal regeneration are heresies that the Church needs to deal with.

    The lead “evangelist” for this cult is Johnny robertson. His show can be viewed online at whatdoesthebiblesaytv.org or on the local Martinsville VA & Reidsville NC stations on Sunday’s at 9:00pm

    Let him come on truthtalklive and condemn all denominational churches, all Christians not in his organization to the lake of fire.

  3. Chris C. said

    Hey Barney, did you hear it? Bob gave us a shout out at the start of the show.

  4. Chris C. said

    But then he brought up the whole transitional forms argument again so…oh well.

  5. Jeff42 said

    Hey Chris, why don’t you call in and set them straight? There’s still plenty of time for you to get through. 🙂

  6. Barney said

    If Stu had been truly interested in discussing what science teaches us about the fossil record and the theory of evolution versus what creationists like Luskin and Griffin say it does, would it not have behooved him to have had available an advocate for natural philosophy?

    best,
    Barney

    PS- For a follow up to post number one’s recipe I suggest Soft Serve Ice Cream.

  7. Barney said

    Re:5

    Jeff42, being familiar with Stu’s on air tactics, cannot you understand why none of the opponents ever actually call the show?

    best,
    Barney

  8. rob said

    One of the guest mentioned the cambrian explosion as being a huge problem for darwinist. Isn’t the cambrian explosion also a problem for young earth creationist?

  9. bookert said

    Jesus, good, Darwin, bad. Got it. Now if we could just figure out what to do with those troublesome dinosaurs.

  10. F. L. A. said

    Silly me; I was expecting to hear something “fresh”.
    Perhaps we all should just go back to the older site that involves this topic?
    Yes Chris C., I hear Bob’s shout out to us.Bob, John works past 6p.m. and I cannot speak[I guess you didn’t read that post where I explained this to Maz?]. How did you expect either of us to call in to speak with you?

  11. John said

    Bob, I’m just going to say for you to re-read my post#996 on the other more recent site regarding this issue.

  12. BOZO bozarth said

    I don’t eat bologna! Maybe I can substitute sliced chicken? 😉

    Also, I don’t have a problem with the dinosaurs, no more than I do the crocodilians(living dinosaurs).

    I also don’t have a problem with the concept of the Cambrian explosion.

    And, good & bad are relative terms in the mind of the atheist/agnostic. We, Bible thumping ignorant young-earth creationists believe in absolute.

    The only absolute to the atheist/agnostic is that there are no absolutes, except that young-earth creationists are absolutely wrong 🙂

    Lastly, but certainly not least: When the evolutonary dogma is thrown into every public school attendees face and the guests had a current public school Science book in hand, then it seems that we don’t necessarily need an evolutionist on to defend evolution. We, young-earth creationists, are in the minority. It is we that need to make our case to all. Evolution is fully and freely proclaimed in every venue.

    We simply want to show that even though evolution is espoused as “fact” and “dogma”, that doesn’t necessarily deem it as true and absolute. I like the Discovery Institute because it takes this at a Scientific level, bypassing the young-earth Biblical issue. Don’t get me wrong, AiG and ICR both have scholarly accredited Scientists on staff. But, as the evolutionists would and will say, they are blinded by their religious curtains of Bible facts and God-stuff 😉

    Oh well….Ice cream sounds good. There is a storm abrewing, local flood, and all I can do is stay dry…

  13. John said

    Crocodilians are not dinosaurs Mr. Bozarth, they simply evolved and co-existed with them.”Living Fossils” would be a better term.
    I thought that it was amusing how the guest Kasy Luskin[did I spell his name correct?] bemoaned that Creationism should be given equal time within the modern school system as an alternative to evolution[he even mentioned aliens![happy grin]], and yet,…..we ALL know just who people like him advocate as the power behind “Intelligent Design”.Aliens indeed! They should just stick with the old word CREATIONISM as that’s really what they are all trying to promote, abet, under a different name and with a more sneaky political tactic. If you think that I may be wrong, then consider the fact that all of the “big names” and organizations trying the hardest to promote this agenda are all Christian Creationists.

  14. ADB said

    Gee,
    I always thought I was a Christian because of my faith in Jesus Christ. I’m awfully sorry to hear that I was mistaken all these years because I don’t interpret the Bible to say that the universe is only 6,000 years. If I’m not a Christian, what am I? Are there any other faiths out there who will take me?

    The curmudgeonly pastor 🙂

  15. BOZO bozarth said

    John,
    Intellegent design is distinct from young-earth creationism.

    I.D. simply says that the evidence demands a designer. That designer can very well be aliens to an I.D.er. The I.D. movement is more focused on disproving atheistic evolution from a Scientific point of view. The movie with Ben Stein is an I.D. movie, not a young-earth creationist movie.

    And, yes “living fossil” would be more correct with crocodilians 😉
    Even though I did hear Dr.Brady Bar, Steve Irwin and Jeff Corwin all refer to crocodilians as “living dinosaurs”.

    ——

    ADB,
    There are issues that Christians debate and discuss that are not concerning our own justification, ie salvation. Yet, are relevant to culture, Biblical accuracy, and proclamation of the Gospel to this generation. Much as Paul the apostle did in Acts 17 before the Aeropagus.

    When I ask an old-earth creationist or gap theorist why they reject a young-earth creationist interpretation of Scripture – 99% answer “because Science is against it”. If your answer would be different, please express it. In the meantime, I retort with “So, you allow a man-made thought to interpret God’s word? So, without evolutionary Science, how would one read say Genesis 1?”

    The word of God tells us about the God of the word. An evolutionary interpretation leads me to conclude that physical death is good, not the wage of sin. That morality is cultural and relative. That law is a matter of individual interpreation. And lastly, if there is a god, for now I am in doubt, he/she/it/they is/are not in control of his/her/its/their creation. Thereby, Christianity is just another religion among thousands all made by man for man to whom be glory forever amen 😦

  16. ADB said

    Bozarth just confirmed my fears that I must not be Christian after all. Will somebody please take me??

    In all seriousness Bozarth no one interprets scripture in a vacuum. What do you know of the hermeneutical spiral in terms of biblical interpretation? Taking your position regarding interpreting scripture, how do you respond to the folks at geocentricity.com who also say that they follow the infallible word of God without influence from science. One of the unfortunate results of the recent popularity of YEC brought about by Ham, Morris, etc. is that well-intentioned and knowledgeable Christians such as myself who interpret the Bible differently are lumped in with godless evolutionists. Anyway, I’d be interested in your answers but don’t intend any ill will at all and don’t wish to engage in an on-going debate because they all too often end up getting somewhat unChristian in tone.

    Best Wishes

  17. Dana said

    As much as I would prefer to avoid being hacked to pieces by such cutting remarks as sometimes occur here, I’ll take the chance with a post…

    Regarding the key question on the table: Can you be a Christian and an evolutionist? The answer is yes, as discussed by Paul in Romans 14 (I think in the moment I was on the air before my phone cut out, I misstated Romans 12). Basically, we can believe different things as long as we are saved and convicted in our conscience toward a true service of God. This applies to “debatable things” (as opposed to specific prohibitions – like the commandments which are not “debatable”) of which I think evolution may be one. I am a young earth creationist now, but it took years of deeper study of the sciences (Biotechnology/pre-med major at a pretty serious technical institute) before I realized most of the “facts” of evolution especially but much else of the sciences we take on a foundation of faith and opened my heart to believe in Jesus Christ – happy to talk more about that at another time. Spontaneous generation of life is a perfect example. An evolutionist must believe that this continuously disproved idea happened at least once and led to all life on earth… But, I digress.

    The other key question to answer: Can a non-Christian ever believe in creation and the God of creation? Scripture states a resounding “no”. I think this is best noted again by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:14 (NASB), “But the natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.” The non-Christian will always think I’m a fool because the things I believe are foolishness to him. These things will always be foolishness to him no matter what evidence I put down, what flaws I point out in his logic or what incredible faith I point out that he must have to believe the things he believes because God says it will be so.

    The only thing we can do for our lost brothers is bring the Word of God to them, as that is the only thing that can convert (Rom 10:14, among others). We don’t do this because we are trying to convert those brothers but because Jesus Christ told us to (Matt 28:19, 20).

    Now, as I prepare for the responses I know shall come, I pray as Stephen did (and beg forgiveness for the over-dramatization), Acts 7:60.

    Peace to you and all of yours.

  18. Charles said

    Rob had asked if the Cambrian explosion was a problem for YEC’s. Not for me. It validates the reality of the worldwide Flood of Genesis 6-9. All the strata of the geologic column were laid down during the year of this catastrophe, and it explains why the column is found nowhere on earth, other than in artists’ conceptions, and why the strata are mixed up in most parts of the world. For instance, the Matterhorn is Cambrian strata, and is supposed to have thrust itself over supposedly “newer” strata (overthrust). All the fossils found in this strata were suddenly enveloped by the cataclysm. It takes a sudden entrapment to make a fossil. If something died, it wouldn’t just lay there waiting for strata, that is supposed to have taken millions of years to form, to cover it over so it could fossilize; it would decay and disintegrate. The reason we have millions of fossils in the Cambrian strata, creatures were suddenly covered over by the cataclysm of the great Flood, and would then fossilize.
    A book that has helped a great deal in understanding this subject is called “The Evolution Handbook.” It is a paperback that is almost 1,000 pages long (people will think you’re reading “War and Peace”), yet it costs only $5.00, because the author doesn’t want the cost to deter you from obtaining this very informative work, and is seeking to get the word out about the mythology of evolution. The following link will take you to a page that describes the book, and has links to an online store for ordering it.
    http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=569&mode=nested&order=0&thold=0

  19. Bob Griffin said

    Glad you heard the shout out. I was hoping some of you could call in. And I do like fried balogna sandwiches with sweet tea.

    FLA Didnt pick that up on the post. Sorry.

    I thought we had one more segment to go so I didnt get in my closing points. 1) Fossils can be interpreted, dated, arranged, drawn, defined and classified in different ways. There will always be disagreement. 2) Archeaology is trying to get maximum info from minimum evidence. Many assumptions are made, and its an inexact science.

    John – I will reread 996 tomorrow.

  20. Alex said

    You can be Christian and not be stupid. The world is obviously older than 6,000 years old. If you are a young earth creationist, I will say that its not all your fault you’re an idiot. I understand, its the way you were raised… poorly.

  21. Boris said

    Alex,
    The reason fundamentalists have such a deep hatred and fear of evolution is two-fold. first they mistakenly assume that science is inherently anti-religious, that it is out to undermine their religious beliefs. Science is not attempting any such thing. In recent times, Christian fundamentalism has been a peculiarly American movement; nowhere else, in fact, has creationism been an issue.

    Second, most fundamentalists identify with an ultraconservative political movement. They long for the return of a moral America, an America that may have never been. All around them they see what they perceive as a declining morality and spirituality, as evidenced by pornography, crime, drug abuse, abortion, feminism, atheism, liberalism, and all sorts of other threatening isms. They reason that if humans share ancestry with other animals, we have no reason to behave as anything but animals. Crime existed long before the theory of evolution, or the Bible, and biologists do not like crime any more than creationists do. Evolutionary theory is not a license to run amok, and neither is belief in the literal interpretation of the Bible a guaranteeor of moral behavior.

  22. some guy said

    Boris–fundamentalists do not have a deep hatred or fear of evolution; the only deep part of evolution is its failure to convince and change. Fundamentalists have a deep doubt of evolution because its preachers and adherents are so hypocritical and unswervingly ignorant. Moreover, the doubt is predicated on the stated truth of Christ’s preeminence over all things “natural” and how he keeps things together, not empiricial processes.

    You don’t find hypocrites in church only; I have found them in Universities and anywhere else human flesh congregates.

  23. BOZO Bozarth said

    Alex,
    Nice to see the intellect in your post 😉
    —-

    Boris,
    We are not afraid of Science, not even evolutionary science. We do, however, believe that all true Scientific theories will align with Scripture. Notice that I didn’t say Scripture will align with Science. The thought(not even a theory really) of evolution is so contrary to Scripture that we cannot reconcile it with Scripture. Unless we do as ADB and others in which we do word plays and eisegetical interpretations of verses and chapters to fit into the realm of evolutionary Science. Therefore now in the Christian community we have modern movements such as gap theorists, progressive creationists, theistic evolutionists, etc. Historical Christianity overall confirmed a young earth and a Creator God who created the universe in 6 days.

    People like ADB and Hugh Ross want to assure the public that Young-Earth creationism is a “modern” teaching, yet it isn’t. Henry Morris and others of his day just saw a great falling away from Biblical truth and they were raised up for this generation to proclaim the neverchanging truth of God as Creator and evolution a sham.

    Fundamentalism doesn’t always mean “young-earth creationist” for CI Scofield was considered a fundamentalist, yet he wasn’t a young-earth creationist. Your last comment is a straw-man.

    Yes, we do believe that an acceptance of evolutionary thought does indeed lead to moral decline. We base that on the last 50 or so years of American history where nothing but secular humanism and atheistic evolution has been taught in the public school system, and the resulting collapse in morality of the majority of American society since then. Yet, to an atheist morality is relative. Thereby you can say that pornography, crime, violence, beastiality, etc. are acceptable practices in our society.

    You are wrong in saying that “evolutionary theory is not a license to run amok” for that is precisely what it is, as Richard Dawkins, Chris Hitchenson, Bozarth and others have asserted in their debates and writings. You are correct in that “belief in the literal interpretation of the Bible is not a guarantor of moral behavior”. It is only by God’s grace through our faith in Jesus Christ that brings about change in a persons moral behavior and that is because the person has had a change of heart and mind.
    ——–

    ADB,
    Don’t wear your feelings on your sleeves. We do not lump old-earth creationists or gap theorists in with godless evolutionists. You are trying to build a straw-man against young-earth creationists that won’t work. Neither Ham nor H.Morris, that I am aware of, condemn other christians with oposing views to the category of godless evolutionist. Debate is how christians hold one another accountable and how we learn from each other. Ham and Ross have debated, both still hold to their oposing views. I believe Ham to be correct in his interpretation and Ross to be in error. I would consider Ross a brother in Christ. Yet, I strongly believe that his teaching is hindering many unbelievers from accepting the Bible as true, which also hinders the unbeliever from accepting Christ as true.

    Geocentrism takes verses, much like the gap theorists and builds its foundation. This aberant teaching has been condemned by all the prominent young-earth creationists.

  24. ADB said

    Bozarth,

    The comments I have made stem from the impression given on yesterday’s show, and what I have witnessed on this blog, that there is no Christian alternative to YEC. On other threads on this site, other Christians have said, in not so many words, that I had no business in the ministry if I did not believe that the universe is 6,000 years old. I used to debate, but discovered it was pointless and unedifying, so I appreciate your charity in this. Creation to me is like eschatology. People do disagree over it and must be able to disagree without the “darwinist” label being thrown around. Myself, I come closer to following the framework hypothesis of the conservative reformed OT scholar Meredith Kline than anything else.

    Best Wishes

  25. Boris said

    Bozo Bozarth,
    You said: We are not afraid of Science, not even evolutionary science. We do, however, believe that all true Scientific theories will align with Scripture. Notice that I didn’t say Scripture will align with Science. The thought(not even a theory really) of evolution is so contrary to Scripture that we cannot reconcile it with Scripture.

    Boris says: Scientific theories are never going to align with a book that claims the Earth is flat, sits on an immovable foundation, has four corners and orbited by the sun every day or that the first woman was made from a rib. The Bible was removed from the public schools not because it is a religious book but because it is full of scientific and historical inaccuracies.

    You said: Unless we do as ADB and others in which we do word plays and eisegetical interpretations of verses and chapters to fit into the realm of evolutionary Science. Therefore now in the Christian community we have modern movements such as gap theorists, progressive creationists, theistic evolutionists, etc. Historical Christianity overall confirmed a young earth and a Creator God who created the universe in 6 days.

    Boris says: You are never going to confirm a young earth or any of the other unscientific nonsense you believe. Never.

    You said: People like ADB and Hugh Ross want to assure the public that Young-Earth creationism is a “modern” teaching, yet it isn’t. Henry Morris and others of his day just saw a great falling away from Biblical truth and they were raised up for this generation to proclaim the neverchanging truth of God as Creator and evolution a sham.

    Boris says: Let’s just see what the early church fathers have to say about that:
    Origen and the other early church fathers were amazed that anyone could take such stories literally, since they are clearly allegorical (he would have been shocked, no doubt, to speak to many modern fundamentalist Christians!) He writes:

    What man of sense will agree with the statement that the first, second and third days, in which the evening was named and the morning, were without Sun, Moon and Stars, and the first day without a heaven? What man is found such an idiot as to suppose that God planted trees in Paradise, in Eden, like a husbandman? I believe that every man must hold these things for images under which a hidden sense lies concealed. –2

    You said: Fundamentalism doesn’t always mean “young-earth creationist” for CI Scofield was considered a fundamentalist, yet he wasn’t a young-earth creationist. Your last comment is a straw-man.
    Yes, we do believe that an acceptance of evolutionary thought does indeed lead to moral decline. We base that on the last 50 or so years of American history where nothing but secular humanism and atheistic evolution has been taught in the public school system, and the resulting collapse in morality of the majority of American society since then.

    Boris says: Nothing is taught about secular humanism to elementary or secondary school students because that is always college level philosophy and the theory of evolution is almost never mentioned outside of biology classes. Evolutionary biology has been taught in EVERY CHRISTIAN college and university in the world that has a science department for MORE than the last 50 years. Fundamentalists cannot even sell their religious hoaxes as science to their own academic community so blaming the public schools for teaching evolution when ALL the Christian colleges and universities teach evolution is ludicrous! Every public school system in the world teaches evolution because it is real science unlike ID or creationism and it isn’t ever going away or going to be disproved. As far as this “resulting collapse in morality of the majority of American society” I’d like to see some statistics to back up this nonsense. Twenty to thirty years after the legalization of abortion violent crime in the 90s was reduced by two-thirds of its levels in the 60s and 70s.

    You said: Yet, to an atheist morality is relative. Thereby you can say that pornography, crime, violence, beastiality, etc. are acceptable practices in our society.

    Boris says: This is the kind of asinine argument that completely discredits the fundamentalist position. We have laws against crime, violence and bestiality because the majority of people in the world find these things unacceptable.

    You said: You are wrong in saying that “evolutionary theory is not a license to run amok” for that is precisely what it is, as Richard Dawkins, Chris Hitchenson, Bozarth and others have asserted in their debates and writings.

    Boris says: None of these people has ever said such a thing. Provide the quotes to back up this lie please.

    You said: You are correct in that “belief in the literal interpretation of the Bible is not a guarantor of moral behavior”. It is only by God’s grace through our faith in Jesus Christ that brings about change in a persons moral behavior and that is because the person has had a change of heart and mind.

    Boris says: Believing that a Jewish zombie actually exists provides no kind of moral foundation whatsoever. Only a person who derives their morals and ethics from their OWN critical analysis is a truly moral person. People who get their morals from other sources only prove that they are unable to think for themselves. This is why you need a holy book sir – you are unable and unwilling to think for yourself. Nothing could be more pathetic.

  26. Bob Griffin said

    ABD

    I think the 6000 year figure is good, but like many things in the bible you cant be exactly sure. You just have to put a lot of faith in the dating methods that give us billions of years.

  27. Bob Griffin said

    John,

    I reread 996. You know you cannot positively prove a transitional fossil. You can only assume. Remember I asked about a living trans form. Now we have punctuated equilibrium, which states species can change in 10,000 years. So show me any living micro or macro example. Not just a beak getting smaller or larger like on Gallapagos. If YEC people assume 6000 years, we should have a 60% chance of seeing something.

  28. BOZO bozarth said

    ADB,
    I would disagree with you as to origins interpretations being in the same light as eschatology. I, as a Hamist(blinded follower of Ken Ham) 🙂 beleive that Biblical creationism goes far beyond whether God used evoluton or not, but is the foundation doctrine of all other doctrines – that of God being Creator of all, who created all for His glory and without the taint of sin.

    Yet, you are able to beleive as you wish. I came from the theistic evolutionary side, and I cannot reconcile any form of macro-evolution with Scripture.

    One thing that gets me is that YEC’s are being portrayed as idiots. And yet, many of the great Scientists were indeed YEC’s. You would be hardpressed to find any Scripture that implies or states emphatically that God used macro-evolution to bring about life.

    ——

    Boris,
    You’re reading your “evil” bible too much 😉
    I don’t believe the earth is flat, nor do I believe the solar system revolves around the earth. We don’t get that from the Scriptures. But as has been quoted already: the natural man receives no the things of God for they are spiritually decerned.

    You mentioned laws to stop crime. Well, in America it is a crime to speed. Yet, in Germany on the Audobaun(sp?) there is no speed limit. Now, a German comes to America but wants to abide by German laws. How dare American law try to impose its morality on a German! Then there is the Dutch that say it is legal to smoke marijuana, but here comes those fundamentalist Americans saying it’s a non-no. How dare they! What gives America the right to force their laws on others!

    Again, evolution leads one to believe in relativity and a law is only binding on one who accepts that law as truth. What is deemed as unacceptable behaviour today, could be at the swing of a vote, deemed acceptable tomorrow. Since you have no absolute morality, you cannot impose your views on anyone.

    For statistics on before and after evolution, you can visit Barna research group to start with.

    No one said that evolution caused crime. What we are saying is that evolution teaches that there really are no crimes, only relative choices made in the advancement of the favored species. Therefore, abortion is acceptable, soon assisted suicide will be acceptable. But how can America say that polygamy is wrong when all Islamic nations say it is the right of man? Maybe America hasn’t evolved enough?

    Boris, seems you are very angry at the Christian God. I was too at one time.

  29. F. L. A. said

    Bob, did you read John’s last post[#1145] on the other evolutionary site?
    Your request has already been answered in various ways by various people.You do not seem to understand, still, and none of us seem to have any ability at our disposal to help you “get it”.What is interesting about your newest request however is that now you are also willing to accept evidence involving Micro-Evolution.Did you not even believe in Micro-Evolution this whole time?

    SomeGuy-My,my, look whose finally decided to try and debate.After you had shut up and deserted the debate on the older site I had thought that we would not see you again.Welcome back.
    Would you like to try and actually debate with us evolutionists for an extended time? We offered much information since you had left the older site for you to try and present a case against.

    Thank you for the information on the book Charles.It seems like one that we might enjoy adding to our library.

    WE[John and I] still accept you as a “True Believer” of the Christian faith, ADB. But then, being evolutionistic Pagans, our judgment and morals in this matter are no doubt flawed[Hee,Hee!].Take it for what it’s worth I guess.

    “That designer can very well be aliens to an I.D.er.”-Mr.Bozarth
    Really? And would a fan of Ken Ham such as yourself actually be willing to accept such a blasphemous concept/revelation?
    I have some doubts.

  30. BOZO bozarth said

    F.L.A.,
    No, I would not accept an alien as the “designer”. And I don’t have to. I am a Biblical young-earth creationist. Which is distinct from the I.D. movement, as I noted previously.

    Some in the I.D. movement do accept that the earth is millions of years old. I.D. is generic in what it believes. The only certainty is that there is a designer[s] that designed.

    Even you as a “evolutionistic pagan” can be an I.D.er. So can the tribal religions, Islam, etc. Even the agnostic can be an I.D.er, just not for sure if it was a designer or not 😉

    Hope that helps. The I.D. movement came about to draw a line between those fundamentalist extremist young-earthers and all realistic religionists 🙂 Basically disassociation by design 😉

  31. Barney said

    That’s a little misleading, BOZO. The mainstream ID movement is overwhelmingly Christian.

  32. ADB said

    Does this mean I don’t have to resign from my charge?? Bozarth, I think it is true that there are difficulties with any interpretation of Genesis 1-2. The “literal” reading you support has the significant problems with order- i.e. plant life before the sun and moon; positing 24 hour days before the sun that defines the term was created. The Hebrew term describing the creation of plant life is the word for natural growth processes certainly implying the passage of some significant time, not the one used for special creation. Additionally, you can end up with some pretty novel interpretations of other texts in order to support the YEC view. In all honesty, the gap theory has little Biblical evidence for it. Though I haven’t studied it in depth this seems to be sort of an argument from silence. The day age idea has some smart people that support it, but there is the difficulty of accounting for the order of creation as presented in Genesis. As for the framework hypothesis (though it is somewhat complex), it is appealing to me because it does take scripture very seriously, is deeply theological, envelops all creation- heaven and earth, and also, frankly, allows for an old earth which seems obvious to me from simply observation (you and I can simply agree to disagree on this one I guess).

    Best Wishes

  33. Bob Griffin said

    F.L.A.

    Micro evolution is no problem. I just believe it is arranged by God, not by blind processes. As to answering my questions, this is how it goes: You give all these marvelous explanations of how evolution works, but then tell me its too slow or too fast to see. Then Im an idiot for not seeing the proof. Why argue about YEC? I really cant understand all of you. Over millions of years and millions of species, you have no living transitional forms. Please explain how natural selection knew how to stop when all the species were complete.

  34. Alex said

    That is the problem with your scriptures… they can be proven wrong, without a shadow of a doubt, and you’ll still say they’re true. Its madness. You have a mental disorder.

    I’m a pretty easy guy to please. Someone says “This is true.” I say, “What evidence do you have of said statement being true?” and they’ll give it to me, and if its quality evidence, I’ll say “Alright, cool.”

    What happens with fundies is that they say “This is true.” and I’ll say “What evidence do you have.” Then they’ll say “Here, this is a book written thousands of years ago by people claiming to be the word of a God that is invisible, everything in this book is FACT.”

    Then I’ll say something along the lines of “You’re an idiot, go jump off a building. Preferably a tall building.”

    Sorry about my last post. No more P.U.I. (Post under the influence).

  35. BOZO bozarth said

    Barney,
    It is not of value as to what majority group makes up the I.D. movement. The fact is that the I.D. movement does not necessarily mean young-earth Biblical creationist, or old-earth Biblical creationist for that matter. Misleading? Only because you are trying to read something into the response. Ben Stein is an I.D.er but I’m not sure he is a Christian?
    ——-

    ADB,
    Yes, we would just have to agree to disagree on this issue. I see no contradiction in the Scriptures, nor do I see where in the Scriptures that I would have a problem of interpretation because of my young-earth stance. We are forgetting who God is. If He so chose to create life before He formed the sun, then so be it. I’m gonna restrain from getting into the Hebrew with you. I’m sure that we would both agree that a Hebrew word, just like Greek can have a number of meanings depending on context.

    My biggest concern is not necessarily how old the earth is, but rather if we give way to millions of years, then we make light of the fall of man in Genesis 3. Even if we give the age of the earth at 1,000,000 yrs old, we are allowing death to come before the fall. I think this has been discussed on other threads but for me as a Christian, and I believe the Hebrew language would show this, death incorporates both the physical and the spiritual realm. Thus dying you shall die. If physical death has always existed in some form, then it sort of takes away from the propitiational death of Christ.

    Bozarth, a great voice for atheism, said it best “take away the fall of man and in the rubble you find the sorry remains of the son of god…” If we limit the fall to only include spiritual death of humanity, or even worse to only include the spiritual death of Adam & Eve(pelagianism) then Mr. Bozarths words become “gospel” to the evolutionist.

  36. BOZO bozarth said

    Alex,

    How old are you? If anything, the fact that the Bible is 1,000s of yrs old and yet is unchanged should say something. Not to mention that it took over 1500yrs for it to be written by at least 40 different men in at least 3 different languages. Written by poor men, by wealthy men, by slaves and by kings. Yet, the Bible reads like it has one author. No other religious book claims the authority that the Bible does. No other religious book can produce the internal evidence that the bible can.

    One last question for you and Boris. Have you read the Bible from cover to cover even once?

  37. Barney said

    Bozo, you know, and I know, that the ID movement is an attempt by it’s major advocates to shoehorn creationism back into the public school systems.

  38. BOZO bozarth said

    Barney,
    Please provide proof of your accusation. I have told you that the I.D. movement is a general movement advocating a designer[s], and inside this movement are, yes, Christians, but also Jews, Muslims, Pagans, trekies, alein worshipers, etc.

    Young-earth creationism is pretty much all Christians. We don’t necessarily want Biblical creationism taught in the public schools. What we do want is the pro’s & con’s of evolution taught. Thus AiG’s new books regarding public school Science books.

    I for one don’t have to worry about what the public school teaches. My child is being homeschooled. Yep, indoctrinated with that fundie wacko young-earth creationism 😉

    Discovery Institute is probably the most wellknown I.D. organization, but it is certainly not the only one.

    But whatever evidence is promoted by the I.D.ers and Biblical creationists will always be rejected by mainstream evolutionary thought. Why is that? Because evolutionists don’t want to be accoutable to a Creator, regardless of who or what that Creator is.

  39. John said

    Mr.Griffin, evolution didn’t stop.
    Ever.
    Apparently you never understood the posts explaining how every living thing is constantly in a state of transition.
    As stated already, your answers have already been answered.
    Keep studying.

  40. BOZO bozarth said

    I think it has also been stated that there needs to be some transitional evidence for macro-evolution, whether in the fossil record or in living organisms.

    Punctuated equilibrium or spontaneous speciation will not cut the cheese 🙂

    Hey, if YEC’s can’t say that God created life as mature kinds, then surely we can hold this same “test” to the evolutionists that insist that evolution is true, yet produce no evidence.

    Darwin’s finches, galapagos tortoises and iguana’s don’t prove macro-evolution any more than me eating lamb proves I’m a wolf. Or at least I don’t think my evolutionary lineage has canine in it? 😉

  41. BOZO bozarth said

    Now how did the pyramids get built?
    Surely our ancestors weren’t as evolved as we are today. But how did they get those big stones up so high without our advanced technology? Yet, we can’t duplicate their work without modern day machines……..

    I was thinking, yes I do sometimes think, wonder how man came up with some of the inventions that has been put forth? Whether we agree on creationism or evolution – mankind is a fascinating life form. Our abilities and perserverence are amazing. Why just think about here we are communcating using our fingers and the messages are going across states, timezones, etc.

    Wow…..! And to understand that even though we are amazing creatures, we are still finite and deteriorating is very sobering to me.

  42. Boris said

    Bob Griffin said: You mentioned laws to stop crime. Well, in America it is a crime to speed. Yet, in Germany on the Audobaun(sp?) there is no speed limit. Now, a German comes to America but wants to abide by German laws. How dare American law try to impose its morality on a German! Then there is the Dutch that say it is legal to smoke marijuana, but here comes those fundamentalist Americans saying it’s a non-no. How dare they! What gives America the right to force their laws on others!

    Boris says: I’m not sure what the argument is here. What gives the Germans and the Dutch the right to impose THEIR laws on Americans visiting in those countries?

    Bob Griffin said: Again, evolution leads one to believe in relativity and a law is only binding on one who accepts that law as truth. What is deemed as unacceptable behaviour today, could be at the swing of a vote, deemed acceptable tomorrow. Since you have no absolute morality, you cannot impose your views on anyone.

    Boris says: History shows us that as man becomes a moral social animal his laws become more civilized not less. The problem for you Bob is that since WE have no agreed upon absolute morality, YOU cannot impose YOUR views on anyone.

    For statistics on before and after evolution, you can visit Barna research group to start with.

    Boris says: In countries where there is the least amount of God belief like Japan and Sweden for example we find the least amount of crime. Conversely our overly religious country has the highest rate of violent crime in non-third world countries. In other countries the crime rate can be tied unfavorably almost exactly to how religious a nation is.

    Bob Griffin said: No one said that evolution caused crime. What we are saying is that evolution teaches that there really are no crimes, only relative choices made in the advancement of the favored species. Therefore, abortion is acceptable, soon assisted suicide will be acceptable. But how can America say that polygamy is wrong when all Islamic nations say it is the right of man? Maybe America hasn’t evolved enough?

    Boris says: Evolution teaches nothing of the sort. You are blurring Social Darwinism, which no one actually adheres to, with the biological Theory of Evolution as all people who don’t understand the very basics of the two always do.

    Boris, seems you are very angry at the Christian God. I was too at one time.

    Boris says: This is because you were never an atheist, nor do you know what an atheist or atheism really is. I don’t believe there is any God, Christian or otherwise, to be angry with.

  43. Alex said

    I tried to read the bible all the way through, but I got really tired of saying “yeah, ok…”

    I would think that the bible was written by many authors would be reason to believe it wasn’t the inspired word of God.

    I’m 18 for another week.

    I’m actually skipping 19 through 24 and going straight to 25.

  44. John said

    Mr.Bozarth, could you please tell us[and please feel free to use big words and lots of scientific information] why you believe that no evidence for evolution has ever been presented by evolutionists?
    Also, WHY does the animal life that you mentioned from the Galapagos Islands not qualify as evidence for Macro-Evolution?
    What kind of evidences would you be willing to accept?
    Please feel free to try and test us as you think we test you.
    I would like to recommend that you read all of our posts on the other sites involving this topic, if you have not already.There are two with the same name, both listed under Apologetics, titled “Was Darwin Right or Wrong?”. Check them out and get back to us with your thoughts, if you would.Perhaps in this way we evolutionists will not have to cover some of the same information and material all over again.It does get tiring after awhile.
    See you tomorrow.

  45. F. L. A. said

    Don’t skip that time Alex!
    You’ll regret it later if you do.

  46. Alex said

    No, I mean legally. As far as how old my body is, I’m still 19, but I want the rights of a 25 year old, like, in case I need to rent a car…

  47. Boris said

    One last question for you and Boris. Have you read the Bible from cover to cover even once?
    Egw anagnwskw ton biblion polloi eteroi nun

    What does that say?

  48. F. L. A. said

    Oh?
    I knew not that men could legally do such a thing.
    Bob, just so you know, If I feel that John has sufficantly answered a post for me then I won’t bother.That’s why I did not address your question after reading John’s post#39. We are both like that, actually.
    And now you know.

  49. Barney said

    BOZO, why do the ID proponents fight their battles in the political and cultural realms instead of the scientific realms? Because it is what it is: an attempt to get (your) religion back in public schools.

    And FWIW, your “golly, ID is misunderstood” approach is pretty corny.

  50. F. L. A. said

    Everybody knows it, Mr.Bozarth. If you had stuck to the label of “Creationism” at least people like myself could respect Christian Intelligent Designers for being more honest.
    Yes, many others including Pagans like John and I follow a [liberal] view of Creationism, however a big difference between us is that Creationists of our sort never try to push our theistic views into the Secular science classes across America.
    We do not base our judgment of the sciences on our Religious convictions, unlike you.

  51. Bob Griffin said

    John and FLA

    Please enlighten me : what are the macro examples from the Gallapagos?

  52. Alex said

    I.D. is funny.

  53. BOZO Bozarth said

    I think boris was getting my comments mixed up with Mr. Griffin in post#42?

    I’ll wait for John or someone to answer Mr. Griffin’s post#51….

    And Barney, until you can admit that I.D. is a different movement than young-earth creationism, I can’t in all sincerity take you seriously.

    And Alex, you have a lot of maturing to do. I would encourage you to at least read through the Bible once before you come on a website condemning it. That shows a lack of maturity and a lot of ignorance.

    I also don’t believe that Boris has read through the Bible even once. I believe all he does is get his answers from “evil bible” website. That isn’t very intellegent.

    I was never an atheist. Never claimed to be. Neither was I ignorant of the issues either. The difference between me and a lot of atheists is that I have looked at every angle, every side of the issue and that is why I am now a Christian who teaches Biblical young-earth creationism.

    I do have a question for anyone: What constitutes a religion? Or, when is a group classified as a religion? What are the attributes?

    Thanks 🙂

  54. F. L. A. said

    Here is an answer….
    Bob, the question concerning lifeforms of the Galapagos Islands in regards to Macro-Evolution was directed by John at Mr.[?]Bozarth to see what he/she would say to defend her/his views on the subject.

    But to try and answer that question for YOU, it would first help for you to know what it actually means for something to be a species, and the qualifications used by modern Natural Sciences to identify what it is that makes one species different from another[even though the lifeforms may be distantly related in some manner].
    And you do not, either by personal choice or otherwise, which renders us unable to ever give you an answer that you would be satisfied with. In a way you are your own adversary in this debate.
    Do you understand?

  55. Barney said

    “And Barney, until you can admit that I.D. is a different movement than young-earth creationism, I can’t in all sincerity take you seriously.” – BOZO

    Dang! Hope this doesn’t mean we can’t still be friends?

  56. Bob Griffin said

    F.L.A.

    I will try again. Darwin was on the island and saw 13 species of finches. Today there are 13 species of finches. Please explain how that shows MACRO evolution. Go to Evolution New and Views and read Caseys latest article. Maybe that will help you get the picture between micro and macro.

  57. F. L. A. said

    Alright Bob, you want to play this hand?
    Darwin saw 13 species, but now there are 16, of 4 different Genus Bob.
    The Galapagos Finches are a case of Adaptive Radiation, a form of evolution in which one species evolves into many over a given time frame, which means, all 16 species originally arose out of one[originally believed to come from the coast of South America].
    One species is believed to be extinct[Darwin’s Large Ground Finch] as nobody’s seen one since 1957. One species evolved into a different species within one season, and another,the Medium Ground Finch[Geospiza fortis] evolved into a separate species within 20 years, so you can finally stop going on with the “why don’t we see evolution happening?” and “we should have a 60% chance of seeing something.” statements.
    And YOU don’t even understand what evolution, Macro or otherwise even is!
    I found and read the latest article by Casey Luskin.It figures that you would turn to him for support. He’s a strong advocate of Intelligent Design.
    I was unimpressed with his article, and enjoyed those about Mr.Luskin on the “Freespace” and “Let There Be Open Debate Over Evolution”[By Casey Luskin himself.Be sure to read all the readers comments added to it at the very end.] sites better.
    And THIS is what YOU think would help ME “get a better picture between micro and macro.”?

    TRY AGAIN.

    Orrrrrrrr, perhaps Bozo Bozarth would like to try and answer for him/herself?

    P.s. Aren’t you glad you brought this up?

  58. BOZO bozarth said

    F.L.A.,

    The 16 species, 4 genus’ of finches, are they still finches?

    You made a comment that I looked over and would like to address now. You said you believed in a form of creationism but didn’t let your religion interfere with Science.

    Question/comment: What good is your religion to you then? Has not “Science” convinced you that there is no deity, only matter? Isn’t that what any knowledgable Scientist will conclude?

    We make a distinction between observable micro-evolution and unobservable macro-evolution. Yet, evolutionists insist that macro-evolution is occurring right before our eyes. But where is the evidence of macro-evolution(finches evolving into bats for example)? Your Galopagos finches are examples of micro-evolution, yet they are still finches, still birds.

    Look at all the different shapes, sizes, colors, etc. of the human race. Yet, we are all still human beings. Funny, it took evolutionary Scientists years to disect and put pigmy & aboriginal humans on display as missing links of evolution. Now, finally evolution says all humans descended from one human. Can anyone say Acts 17:26? or Genesis chapters 1 & 2? At least 2,000yrs and yet still speaking Scientific truth………….

    That’s what my “religion” can offer Science. Truthfulness and accuracy that never changes.

  59. Charles said

    Why is Alex so venomous in his posts? He called me an idiot, and that people like me have a mental disorder. He also invites all those who believe in the truth of Scripture to kill themselves. Can we just have a cogent discussion without resorting to name-calling? If it so obvious that the earth is significantly older than 6,000 years, please show me.

  60. F. L. A. said

    Yes, they are still finches, in 16 different species. Is this observation supposed to render my point invalid? Evolution has still occurred, and continues to this very second. Yes finches are finches and finches are birds, but finches that were once one species that evolved into 16 completely different species[they can’t interbreed with one another, being so different from each other.They are not just the same bird with 16 different beak shapes, you know.] still proves my point very well, and birds were not always birds.Your argument is as sound as if you had said “African Gray Parrots and Macaws are still parrots, and parrots are still parrots, which proves my point against macro-evolution among birds.”
    Birds into bats? Now you sound like Bob. How about amphibians to reptiles, or Ambulocetids and Remingtonocetids to the modern Cetaceans? And yet people like you go on “Where is the evidence? Where is the evidence?” Oh please!!!
    There is a lot of difference between the multiple “races” of human kind, and the different species of Finches that we’ve been discussing, and if you don’t know why, then you should do yourself a favor and drop this example right now until you become better educated on the topic.
    Funny, but that “one human” that you refer to would not be labeled as human by many Young Earth Christian Creationists, who tend to follow the view of humanities ancient ancestors as being either “all ape” or “all human”. So much for your truthfulness and accuracy. And I would be happy to talk about that too, were it not for the fact that this has already been covered on the original site. Did you even read the other two sites? You have enough time on your hands…

    As to your question on theology in relation to the sciences, no, it changes nothing with me.I am emotionally secure enough with my theological beliefs to not get all bent out of shape over a subject like evolution.I know, as any good scientist knows, that the modern sciences, although fantastic, have not all the answers, and that the Evolutionary Sciences have nothing to do with the origins of life[that’s another theoretical branch of study], but simply help us understand what happened to life forms within this world AFTER “the beginning”.
    “Knowledgabel” scientist, or did you mean “Atheistic” scientist?
    The good scientist impartial in his/her observations and revelations and is always learning, always revising and refining, always testing, dispelling faulty information for better information and ideas,etc., etc., but always remembering that he/she MIGHT be wrong in some little or big way.If a theory and it’s evidences “hold water” well enough, long enough, then it’s thought of as “fact”[and evolution has a LOT of evidence, whether you accept any of it or not.] until proven otherwise, hence all the testing and refining.
    No, evolution bothers me not one iota and is in fact seen by people like John and myself as a tool of the deities, used at their whim. Their motivations are their own business, and likely not to be well understood by one such as myself anyway. They are the weirdest of the weird,as far as I can tell.
    I shall go now to hunt things. Be back later.

  61. F. L. A. said

    Charles, Alex is rash, immature, and…playing with you.He’s only 19 years old. Just ignore his harsh taunts.They are only a cluster of letters on a screen.

  62. John said

    Hmmmm, no need for my input here[smile].

  63. BOZO Bozarth said

    “The good scientist impartial in his/her observations and revelations and is always learning, always revising and refining, always testing, dispelling faulty information for better information and ideas,etc., etc., but always remembering that he/she MIGHT be wrong in some little or big way.”

    And yet, no evolutionist abides by your definition of “good” scientist. Lets ask Dawkins, Hitchinson, Brown, etc. if it is possible, just possible for a deity to be the origin of life. Wanna take a guess at their answers?

    So, you are deeming speciation as proof of macro-evolution? By that reasoning, homo sapien should be showing proof that this is occuring within our own classification.

    Face it, billions of years, supposedly, and yet the lack of evidence for macro-evolution – dead or living.

    And yes, I’ve read the other threads. Which is why I do not intend to keep on with this discussion.

    We all look at the same evidence. Yet, we come to differing conclusions based on our presupositions, not conclusive evidence.

    The atheist deems all of life as “by chance”. The agnostic deems all of life as “by chance, possibly by design”. The theistic evolutionists deem all of life as “by design through evolutionary process”. The Biblical Christian deems all of life as “ek Theos, ex nihilo” for His glory.

    And I don’t get bent out of shape over evolution either. I came out of an evolutionary mindset. The evidence just isn’t there in support of macro-evolution. And sadly, we won’t be around for another million years to see if those finches ever changed into anything else besides birds……

  64. John said

    On second thought… Charles, why don’t you also read the posts on the original two sites? There may be something within them that satisfies your curiosity.”Was Darwin Right Or Wrong?” listed under Apologetics. There are two sites and they’re both HUGE, but very interesting reading.

  65. BOZO Bozarth said

    F.L.A.,
    also, if all the evolutionary sciences do is tell us what happened “after” the beginning, then why do the evolutionary scientists insist that life did not begin through a deity or higher power?

    That goes back to the “good scientist” argument you wrote about. A good scientist, using only science, would have to say “I don’t know how the beginning got started. There is a 50/50 chance that it was started by some outside force, call it deity if you like.” But instead, all we get is “There is NO god but cosmos and evolution is its way.”

    Do you not see the bias within the evolutionary community toward any deity, including yours?

  66. John said

    I thought you said that you had given up?
    I’ll fill in for Ferox for a bit.
    As I do not know how to cut and past and type rather slow, I’ll just respond to each of your comments within your two posts as they go down.

    This is a matter of your personal perception.
    Dawkins, Hitchinson, and Brown etc. are SOME scientists, not all scientists. They speak the loudest perhaps, but there are others.
    This is like when Boris focused his attention on Adolf Hitler to prove that real Christians are horrible people. I believe that Ferox was speaking of the “ideal”. Naturally the common reality may not always live up to our standards, but this still does not mean that the ideal is a fictional character.

    Yes, we ARE evolving, Bozo.Mankind is not the same as it was 2 million years ago, 15 thousand years ago, 15 years ago…..

    The fact that you believe there is a lack of evidence for macro evolution tells me that, although you may have read the posts on the other sites[ALLLLLL of them? Really? Hmmmm.] you either did not, could not, of chose not to understand what was presented to you. What about Ferox’s mention of Cetaceans ancient ancestors? I guess that example doesn’t count, huh? You should hang out with Bob Griffin and Maz Herman[smile].

    Why don’t you think that we will be around for another million years[ANOTHER million years? What kind of Young-Earth Christian Creationist talk is THAT?]? Was that wishful thinking on your part?

    Your first question within the next post brings us back to my first answer to you about good scientists.You really should try to be more specific with your claims, if you can.

    And finally, of course we can see a biasness towards our way of thinking, theological or otherwise. So? This does not make the Evolutionary Sciences evidences less valid or the opinions and speculation of Hard headed Atheistic evolutionists more valid.

  67. BOZO Bozarth said

    John,
    Can you give me the names of some good Scientists who are not atheists and who abide by F.L.A.’s definition?

    Seeing that neither you nor I were alive back 2 million years ago, we can only guestimate what our supposed ancestors were. Unless, we have the writings of someone who was there in the beginning. And that is what Christians claim to have in the Bible. I do not argue that humanity is evolving in a “social” and “cultural” way, yet that is not physically changing toward a new kind or even species.

    Cetacean ancestors? But what about the crocodilians who are supposedly unchanged for millions of years? I assume they have reached their plateau in the evolutionary journey? Again, with dating methods as faulty as what our great evolutionary scientists have, I am hard pressed to believe their report on fossil ages.

    The millions of years statement was a statement of myself actually living for a million years to actually observe some speck of macro-evolution.

    Biasness can keep one from looking outside their own box. That is what we Biblical young-earth creationists are saying about the evolutionists. Their bias against deity, specifically the Christian God, taints all of their reasoning and interpretations. It is clear in the textbooks, in the museums, on the Discovery/History/Learning, and PBS channels.

    You say that evolutionary science is distinct from atheism. The spokespersons for evolution speak to the contrary. Evolution is the foundation of atheism. 100% of atheists are evolutionists and 95% of evolutionists are atheists.

    You as a wiccan evolutionist are in the minority. What I don’t understand with you and F.L.A. is that you have religion, but it is separated from your interpretation of Science. What good are your deities?

    Christians do not separate our God from science. We see Him as the author and controller. We see science being spoken of throughout the Scriptures, beginning with verse 1.

    And, yes I am done. 50+ posts. The other threads have 100+ +.

    Y’all have a great weekend 🙂

  68. John said

    Wiccan is spelled with an upper case W, Bozo.
    That’s right Bozo, EVERYBODY in the whole world within the scientific community is fighting against you and trying to keep you down, you poor,pitiful,persecuted victim[grin].Believe whatever brings you strength and joy.

    As an answer to your question concerning my faith, perhaps you will find what you seek within Apologetics on a site listed “Understanding the world of Wicca and More”.

    “Christians do not separate our God from science”-Bozo
    Perhaps you should give it a try sometime.You may actually surprise yourself and learn something useful.

  69. Boris said

    Now I’ve read some pretty outrageous claims on Christian blogs but this one has to be as indefensible as they get:

    Evolution is the foundation of atheism. 100% of atheists are evolutionists and 95% of evolutionists are atheists.

    Does this poster really think that there were no atheists before the discovery of evolution by natural selection?

    “Do we hold that the gods exist, deceive ourselves with insubstantial dreams and lies, while random careless chance and change alone control the world?” – Euripides (c. 480-406 BCE)

    “Shrines! Shrines! Surely you don’t believe in the gods. What’s your argument? Where’s your proof?” – Aristophenes (c. 448-385 BCE)

    “Everything has a natural explanation. The moon is not a god but a great rock and the sun a hot rock.” – Anaxagoras (c. 500-428 BCE)

    “Men create gods after their own image, not only with regard to their form but with regard to their mode of life.” – Aristotle (c. 384-322 BCE).

    “Sire, I have no need of that hypothesis.” – Pierre Laplace (1749-1827) to Napoleon Bonaparte who, after reading Laplace’s Celestial Mechanics – which explained the universe in purely in terms of natural causes – observed that it contained no mention of God.

    “Well, all I say is, honest atheism fro my money.” – Thomas Otway (1652-1685)

    “Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.” – Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4-65 CE)

    Also Baylor, Notre Dame, Brigham Young, SMU, TCU, Stanford and every other Christian college and university in the world that teaches science, teaches evolution and common descent. Most of the Christians in the world including all the Catholics have accepted evolution. The only people who haven’t pretty much all live in the south and Midwest parts of the United States and all Christian fundamentalists. Imagine that. The same people who have denied every scientific discovery that has ever been made, even the ones made by other Christians, for the last 2000 years is denying the facts of evolution. Need I remind anyone that this discovery of evolution by natural selection happened in the 19th century? It is now the 21rst century and we still have people who claim not to believe something discovered in the 19th century!

  70. Tripp said

    Poor Alex. It must really suck to not be in control of his own hormones.

  71. BOZO Bozarth said

    I’ll capitalize the religion of Wicca, but notthe individual follower of Wicca, as in wiccan.

    The difference, well there are many 🙂 , our thinking comes from our “religion”, not inspite of it. We have entirely different world-views.

    Doesn’t make me any better than you. Just glad to know Jesus Christ.

  72. John said

    Should I not capitalize the word for a follower of Christianity as a “Christian” anymore?

  73. BOZO Bozarth said

    John,
    It makes no difference to me how you spell [C]hristian. All I know is that it is all about Jesus Christ for me. He is Creator of all and Lord of all, whether I or you believe it.

    ——————————-

    Boris,
    Do you actually believe that evolution was an unknown concept before Darwin? Some would say that the Epicureans and Stoics mentioned in Acts 17(Christian Bible) taught and believed a type of evolutionary pantheism, possibly even humanism.

    What I said was that today 100% of atheists are evolutionists. And I love the “BCE” that you use. You really have bought into atheism and evolution, hook line and sinker. As for the quotes, a few fools among a host of believers. Skeptics have always existed since the fall of man, even one generation later.

    All creationists are not southern American’s. You do know that there are creationists that are not American? You do know that some of the greatest scientists who ever lived where Christian and creationists? But of course, we fundamentalist creationists are twisting history and corrupting society in hopes of turning America into a Christian nation………….

    Here it is 2,000yrs after Christ, A.D. for those not politically correct. And we still have people who deny His resurrection in the 21st century A.D.!

  74. F. L. A. said

    Bozo, Boris implied that ATHEISM existed well before the concept of atheistic evolution/evolution, and that thus, your claims about Evolutionary Sciences and thinking being the birthplace of Atheism is unfounded. Do you actually think of Seneca and Aristotle as fools? Do you even KNOW who four of those seven people quoted are?
    These were some of the best minds of their times. You assume much.
    As for denial of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, well, it’s not as if there was any evidence to support it, save for some testimonies.

  75. Alex said

    I’m 18, thank you. I also read most of the bible. I skipped parts of the old testament, because they were kind of silly. The new testament is alright though. Its very heartfelt, but still a little crazy at times. Revelations reads like hallucinations of a madman.

    And the earth is more than six thousand years old. We have fossils, carbon dating, math… go read a real book or go back to 4th grade.

    I forgive you all though. I’ve decided its not your fault you believe the way you do. If I was so afraid what would happen if I did something (not blindly believing in a deity) that disappointed all my friends/family, I’d probably believe something that wasn’t true too.

    That still doesn’t make you any less wrong though…

  76. Alex said

    “Men create gods after their own image, not only with regard to their form but with regard to their mode of life.” – Aristotle (c. 384-322 BCE).

    I love this quote.

  77. Maz said

    I’v been on holiday so I wasn’t here when this question began…..but I can’t believe were going over this all over again!

    F.L.A: Have you read the book by Josh McDowell entitled, ”The Resurrection Factor”.?
    Or one entitled, ”Who Moved the Stone?”, (can’t remember who wrote that, a man named Morrison I think), but both put forward very good evidence for why we should believe that the Resurresction of Jesus Christ actually happened.

  78. F. L. A. said

    Thank you for the book titles.
    We shall look into them, Maz.

  79. Boris said

    Below is a partial list of some transitional fossils that definitely DO exist and can be found on display in museums and universities all over the world. I’ d like to see this delusional scientific imbecile Bob Griffin prove that these fossils do not exist.

    Transition from primitive jawless fish to sharks, skates, and rays:
    o Cladoselachians (e.g., Cladoselache).
    o Hybodonts (e.g. Hybodus)
    o Heterodonts (e.g. Heterodontus)
    o Hexanchids (e.g. Chlamydoselache)
    Transition from primitive bony fish to holostean fish:
    o Palaeoniscoids (e.g. Cheirolepis); living chondrosteans such as Polypterus and Calamoichthys, and also the living acipenseroid chondrosteans such as sturgeons and paddlefishes.
    o Primitive holosteans such as Semionotus.
    Transition from holostean fish to advanced teleost fish:
    o Leptolepidomorphs, esp. Leptolepis, an excellent holostean-teleost intermediate
    o Elopomorphs, both fossil and living (tarpons, eels)
    o Clupeomorphs (e.g. Diplomystus)
    o Osteoglossomorphs (e.g. Portheus)
    o Protacanthopterygians
    Transition from primitive bony fish to amphibians:
    o Paleoniscoids again (e.g. Cheirolepis)
    o Osteolepis — one of the earliest crossopterygian lobe-finned fishes, still sharing some characters with the lungfish (the other group of lobe-finned fish). Had paired fins with a leg-like arrangement of bones, and had an early-amphibian-like skull and teeth.
    o Eusthenopteron (and other rhipidistian crossopterygian fish) — intermediate between early crossopterygian fish and the earliest amphibians. Skull very amphibian-like. Strong amphibian-like backbone. Fins very like early amphibian feet.
    o Icthyostegids (such as Icthyostega and Icthyostegopsis) — Terrestrial amphibians with many of Eusthenopteron’s fish features (e.g., the fin rays of the tail were retained). Some debate about whether Icthyostega should be considered a fish or an amphibian; it is an excellent transitional fossil.
    o Labyrinthodonts (e.g., Pholidogaster, Pteroplax) — still have some icthyostegid features, but have lost many of the fish features (e.g., the fin rays are gone, vertebrae are stronger and interlocking, the nasal passage for air intake is well defined.)
    Transition from amphibians to reptiles:
    o Seymouriamorph labyrinthodonts (e.g. Seymouria) — classic labyrinthodont skull and teeth, with reptilian vertebrae, pelvis, humerus, and digits; amphibian ankle.
    o Cotylosaurs (e.g. Hylonomus, Limnoscelis) — slightly amphibian skull (e.g. with amphibian-type pineal opening), with rest of skeleton classically reptilian.
    o The cotylosaurs gave rise to many reptile groups of tremendous variety. I won’t go into the transitions from cotylosaurs to the advanced anapsid reptiles (turtles and possibly mesosaurs), to the euryapsid reptiles (icthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, and others), or to the lepidosaurs (eosuchians, lizards, snakes, and the tuatara), or to most of the dinosaurs, since I don’t have infinite time. Instead I’ll concentrate on the synapsid reptiles (which gave rise to mammals) and the archosaur reptiles (which gave rise to birds).
    Transition from reptiles to mammals:
    o Pelycosaur synapsids — classic reptilian skeleton, intermediate between the cotylosaurs (the earliest reptiles) and the therapsids (see next)
    o Therapsids (e.g. Dimetrodon) — the numerous therapsid fossils show gradual transitions from reptilian features to mammalian features. For example: the hard palate forms, the teeth differentiate, the occipital condyle on the base of the skull doubles, the ribs become restricted to the chest instead of extending down the whole body, the legs become “pulled in” instead of sprawled out, the ilium (major bone of the hip) expands forward.
    o Cynodont theriodonts (e.g. Cynognathus) — very mammal-like reptiles. Or is that reptile-like mammals? Highly differentiated teeth (a classic mammalian feature), with accessory cusps on cheek teeth; strongly differentiated vertebral column (with distinct types of vertebrae for the neck, chest, abdomen, pelvis, and tail — very mammalian), mammalian scapula, mammalian limbs, mammalian digits (e.g. reduction of number of bones in the first digit). But, still has unmistakably reptilian jaw joint.
    o Tritilodont theriodonts (e.g. Tritylodon, Bienotherium) — skull even more mammalian (e.g. advanced zygomatic arches). Still has reptilian jaw joint.
    o Ictidosaur theriodonts (e.g. Diarthrognathus) — has all the mammalian features of the tritilodonts, and has a double jaw joint; both the reptilian jaw joint and the mammalian jaw joint were present, side-by-side, in Diarthrognathus’s skull. A really stunning transitional fossil.
    o Morganucodonts (e.g. Morganucodon) — early mammals. Double jaw joint, but now the mammalian joint is dominant (the reptilian joint bones are beginning to move inward; in modern mammals these are the bones of the middle ear).
    o Eupantotheres (e.g. Amphitherium) — these mammals begin to show the complex molar cusp patterns characteristic of modern marsupials and eutherians (placental mammals). Mammalian jaw joint.
    o Proteutherians (e.g. Zalambdalestes) — small, early insectivores with molars intermediate between eupantothere molars and modern eutherian molars.
    o Those wondering how egg-laying reptiles could make the transition to placental mammals may wish to study the reproductive biology of the monotremes (egg-laying mammals) and the marsupials. The monotremes in particular could almost be considered “living transitional fossils”. [see Peter Lamb’s suggested marsupial references at end]
    Transition from reptiles to birds:
    o Lisboasaurus estesi and other “troodontid dinosaur-birds” — a bird-like reptile with very bird-like teeth (that is, teeth very like those of early toothed birds [modern birds have no teeth]). May not have been a direct ancestor; may have been a “cousin” of the birds instead.
    o Protoavis — this is a highly controversial fossil that may or may not be an extremely early bird. Not enough of the fossil was recovered to determine if it is definitely related to the birds, or not. I mention it in case people have heard about it recently.
    o Archeopteryx — reptilian vertebrae, pelvis, tail, skull, teeth, digits, claws, sternum. Avian furcula (wishbone, for attachment of flight muscles), forelimbs, and lift-producing flight feathers. Archeopteryx could probably fly from tree to tree, but couldn’t take off from the ground, since it lacked a keeled breastbone (for attachment of large flight muscles) and had a weak shoulder (relative to modern birds).
    o “Chinese bird” [I don’t know what name was given to this fossil] — A fossil dating from 10-15 million years after Archeopteryx. Bird-like claws on the toes, flight-specialized shoulders, fair-sized sternal keel (modern birds usually have large sternal keel); also has reptilian stomach ribs, reptilian unfused hand bones, & reptilian pelvis. This bird has a fused tail (“pygostyle”), but I don’t know how long it was, or if it was all fused or just part of it was fused.
    o “Las Hoyas bird” [I don’t know what name was given to this fossil] — This fossil dates from 20-30 m.y. after Archeopteryx. It still has reptilian pelvis & legs, with bird-like shoulder. Tail is medium-length with a fused tip (Archeopteryx had long, unfused tail; modern birds have short, fused tail). Fossil down feather was found with the Las Hoyas bird.
    o Toothed Cretaceous birds, e.g. Hesperornis and Ichthyornis. Skeleton further modified for flight (fusion of pelvis bones, fusion of hand bones, short & fused tail). Still had true socketed teeth, which are missing in modern birds.
    o [note: a classic study of chicken embryos showed that chicken bills can be induced to develop teeth, indicating that chickens (and perhaps other modern birds) still retain the genes for making teeth.]

    Now, on to some of the classes of mammals.

    Transitional fossils from early eutherian mammals to primates:
    o Early primates — paromomyids, carpolestids, plesiadapids. Lemur-like clawed primates with generalized nails.
    o Notharctus, an early Eocene lemur
    o Parapithecus, a small Old World monkey (Oligocene)
    o Propliopithecus, a small primate intermediate between Parapithecus and the more recent O.W. monkeys. Has several ape-like characters.
    o Aegyptopithecus, an early ape.
    o Limnopithecus, a later ape showing similarities to the modern gibbons.
    o Dryopithecus, a later ape showing similarities to the non-gibbon apes.
    o Ramapithecus, a dryopithecine-like ape showing similarities to the hominids but now thought to be an orang ancestor.
    o Australopithecus spp., early hominids. Bipedal.
    o Homo habilis.
    o Homo erectus. Numerous fossils across the Old World.
    o Homo sapiens sapiens. This is us. (NB: “Cro-magnon man” belongs here too. Cro-magnons were a specific population of modern humans.)
    o Homo sapiens neanderthalensis (not on the direct line to H. sapiens sapiens, but worth mentioning).
    o [I haven’t described these fossils in detail because they’re fairly well covered in any intro biology text, or in any of several good general- interest books on human evolution.]
    Transitional fossils from early eutherian mammals to rodents:
    o Paramyids, e.g. Paramys — early “primitive” rodent
    o Paleocastor — transitional from paramyids to beavers
    o [yick. I was going to summarize rodent fossils but Paramys and its friends gave rise to 5 enormous and very diverse groups of rodents, with about ten zillion fossils. Never mind.]
    Transitional fossils among the cetaceans (whales & dolphins):
    o Pakicetus — the oldest fossil whale known. Only the skull was found. It is a distinct whale skull, but with nostrils in the position of a land animal (tip of snout). The ears were partially modified for hearing under water. This fossil was found in association with fossils of land mammals, suggesting this early whale maybe could walk on land.
    o Basilosaurus isis — a recently discovered “legged” whale from the Eocene (after Pakicetus). Had hind feet with 3 toes and a tiny remnant of the 2nd toe (the big toe is totally missing). The legs were small and must have been useless for locomotion, but were specialized for swinging forward into a locked straddle position — probably an aid to copulation for this long-bodied, serpentine whale.
    o Archaeocetes (e.g. Protocetus, Eocetus) — have lost hind legs entirely, but retain “primitive whale” skull and teeth, with forward nostrils.
    o Squalodonts (e.g. Prosqualodon) — whale-like skull with dorsal nostrils (blowhole), still with un-whale-like teeth.
    o Kentriodon, an early toothed whale with whale-like teeth.
    o Mesocetus, an early whalebone whale
    o [note: very rarely a modern whale is found with tiny hind legs, showing that some whales still retain the genes for making hind legs.]
    Transitional fossils from early eutherian mammals to the carnivores:
    o Miacids (e.g. Viverravus and Miacis) — small weasel-like animals with very carnivore-like teeth, esp. the carnassial teeth.
    o Arctoids (e.g. Cynodictis, Hesperocyon) — intermediate between miacids and dogs. Limbs have elongated, carnassials are more specialized, braincase is larger.
    o Cynodesmus, Tomarctus — transitional fossils between arctoids and the modern dog genus Canis.
    o Hemicyon, Ursavus — heavy doglike fossils between the arctoids and the bears.
    o Indarctos — early bear. Carnassial teeth have no shearing action, molars are square, short tail, heavy limbs. Transitional to the modern genus Ursus.
    o Phlaocyon — a climbing carnivore with non-shearing carnassials, transitional from the arctoids to the procyonids (raccoons et al.)
    Meanwhile back at the ranch,
    o Plesictis, transitional between miacids (see above) and mustelids (weasels et al.)
    o Stenoplesictis and Palaeoprionodon, early civets related to the miacids (see above)
    o Tunguricits, transitional between early civets and modern civets
    o Ictitherium, transitional between early civets to hyenas
    o Proailurus, transitional from early civets to early cats
    o Dinictis, transitional from early cats to modern “feline” cats
    o Hoplophoneus, transitional from early cats to “saber-tooth” cats
    Transitional fossils from early eutherians to hoofed animals:
    o Arctocyonid condylarths — insectivore-like small mammals with classic mammalian teeth and clawed feet.
    o Mesonychid condylarths — similar to the arctocyonids, but with blunt crushing-type cheek teeth, and flattened nails instead of claws.
    o Late condylarths, e.g. Phenocodus — a fair-sized animal with hoofs on each toe (all toes were present), a continuous series of crushing-type cheek teeth with herbivore-type cusps, and no collarbone (like modern hoofed animals).
    o Transitional fossils from early hoofed animals to perissodactyls:
    o [Perissodactyls are animals with an odd number of toes; most of the weight is borne by the central 3rd toe. Horses, rhinos, tapirs.]
    o Tetraclaeonodon — a Paleocene condylarth showing perissodactyl-like teeth
    o Hyracotherium — the famous “dawn horse”, an early perissodactyl, with more elongated digits and interlocking ankle bones, and slightly different tooth cusps, compared to to Tetraclaeonodon. A small, doggish animal with an arched back, short neck, and short snout; had 4 toes in front and 3 behind. Omnivore teeth.
    o [The rest of horse evolution will be covered in an upcoming “horse fossils” post in a few weeks. To whet your appetite:]
    o Orohippus — small, 4/3 toed, developing browser tooth crests
    o Epihippus — small, 4/3 toed, good tooth crests, browser
    o Epihippus (Duchesnehippus) — a subgenus with Mesohippus-like teeth
    o Mesohippus — 3 toed on all feet, browser, slightly larger
    o Miohippus — 3 toed browser, slightly larger [gave rise to lots of successful three-toed browsers]
    o Parahippus — 3 toed browser/grazer, developing “spring foot”
    o ‘Parahippus’ leonensis — a Merychippus-like species of Parahippus
    o ‘Merychippus’ gunteri — a Parahippus-like species of Merychippus
    o ‘Merychippus’ primus — a more typical Merychippus, but still very like Parahippus.
    o Merychippus — 3 toed grazer, spring-footed, size of small pony (gave rise to tons of successful three-toed grazers)
    o Merychippus (Protohippus) — a subgenus of Merychippus developing Pliohippus-like teeth.
    o Pliohippus & Dinohippus — one-toed grazers, spring-footed
    o Equus (Plesippus) — like modern equines but teeth slightly simpler.
    o Equus (Hippotigris), the modern 1-toed spring-footed grazing zebras.
    o Equus (Equus), the modern 1-toed spring-footed grazing horses & donkeys. [note: very rarely a horse is born with small visible side toes, indicating that some horses retain the genes for side toes.]
    o Hyrachyids — transitional from perissodactyl-like condylarths to tapirs
    o Heptodonts, e.g. Lophiodont — a small horse-like tapir, transitional to modern tapirs
    o Protapirus — a probable descendent of Lophiodont, much like modern tapirs but without the flexible snout.
    o Miotapirus — an almost-modern tapir with a flexible snout, transitional between Protapirus and the modern Tapirus.
    o Hyracodonts — early “running rhinoceroses”, transitional to modern rhinos
    o Caenopus, a large, hornless, generalized rhino transitional between the hyracodonts and the various later groups of modern & extinct rhinos.
    o Transitional fossils from early hoofed animals to some of the artiodactyls (cloven-hoofed animals):
    o Dichobunoids, e.g. Diacodexis, transitional between condylarths and all the artiodactyls (cloven-hoofed animals). Very condylarth-like but with a notably artiodactyl-like ankle.
    o Propalaeochoerus, an early pig, transitional between Diacodexis and modern pigs.
    o Protylopus, a small, short-necked, four-toed animal, transitional between dichobunoids and early camels. From here the camel lineage goes through Protomeryx, Procamelus, Pleauchenia, Lama (which are still alive; these are the llamas) and finally Camelus, the modern camels.
    o Archeomeryx, a rabbit-sized, four-toed animal, transitional between the dichobunoids and the early deer. From here the deer lineage goes through Eumeryx, Paleomeryx and Blastomeryx, Dicrocerus (with antlers) and then a shmoo of successful groups that survive today as modern deer — muntjacs, cervines, white-tail relatives, moose, reindeer, etc., etc.
    o Palaeotragus, transitional between early artiodactyls and the okapi & giraffe. Actually the okapi hasn’t changed much since Palaeotragus and is essentially a living Miocene giraffe. After Palaeotragus came Giraffa, with elongated legs & neck, and Sivatherium, large ox-like giraffes that almost survived to the present.

    So, there’s a partial list of transitional fossils.

  80. Alex said

    Owned!

  81. Maz said

    Boris: Name calling like that will not go down well here. I should tone it down a bit….or beter still, not do it atall. Why people can’t disagree without resorting to such childish behavior escapes me.

  82. Bob Griffin said

    57

    One species evolved into another in one season? Ive never seen that. Do see where the beak gets smaller or larger. Ive never seen the 16 number either. You dont agree with Caseys articles, and I dont agree with yours. Were even.

  83. Boris said

    Maz,
    This Bob Griffin has accused the scientific community of engaging in a conspiracy to promote a false theory specifically to destroy is particular religion. He gets away with this nonsense on the public airways and then you think no one should return the insult. Bob Griffin is basically calling just about every working scientist in the world a liar and a buffoon. Should we who support science and are grateful to the better and longer lives evolutionary biologists have given us all not point out that hypocrites like Bob Griffin are the liars and the buffoons? Every time you and this guy go to a doctor you prove that you really DO trust and believe in evolution. I wish doctors would ask people if they are creationists and then refuse to cure them with their knowledge of evolution based on the patient’s religious beliefs. Then we could see the true colors of these hypocrites and liars.

  84. Bob Griffin said

    79 Boris

    I assume you are a doctor or atheist. A lot of the fossils you list do exist, just can be interpreted differently, dated differently, etc. I have the entire list you printed and more. How many were drawn from a few bones? How many human fossils were reclassified or renamed? How many were found in different strata? How did the horses on the ranch go from 4/3/1 toe or hoof? Where is #2? What was Piltdown Man drawn from? 1 pigs tooth? How many other fossils are drawn from a few bones and presented as a whole? Why arent apes extinct? If we have apes and humans, why dont we have transitional beings between the 2? Fossils can be debated by both sides forever. You smugly assume your side is right. Still waiting for the living transitional form. Any answer besides the lame “we are all transitional forms?”

  85. Folks, the ground rules here are as follows:

    – no profanity, obscenity, vulgarity or links to sites containing the aforementioned
    – no personal attacks, name calling or threats
    – we demand respect to and from all faiths, including, but not limited to Christians, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Atheists, Wiccans, Catholics, etc., etc.
    – stick to the debate and the topic/issues

    Failure to comply will result in 2 warnings, with the 3rd being banishment from the site. We own the site and the servers, so if you want to call it censorship, then be our guest.

    Warning #1 issued to Boris. Your comments are inciteful and thought-provoking. Please don’t attack anyone personally.

    Thank you,
    Moderator (not Stu)

  86. Boris said

    Sorry moderator.
    Bob Griffin, the reason there are no transitions between apes and humans is because humans did not descend FROM apes but from a common ancestor WITH apes, moneys and chimps. The questions you ask reflect the fact that you have no understanding about what exactly the theory of evolution does explain.

    There are no “sides” in the scientific community on the subject of transitional fossils. There is no debate among scientists about the validity or usefulness of evolution either nor has there been for over a century. This debate exists only in the minds of creationists and nowhere else.

  87. Alex said

    They’re out to get you Boris. I’ve done a great many of those things you aren’t supposed to, and I haven’t gotten a warning. They’re afraid of you because you’re right.

  88. Alex said

    I mean, I haven’t done anything against the forum rules…

  89. Alex – You’re what we consider “a person of interest.”

    Ha-Ha! Just kidding.

    We’re not out to get anybody. We’re protecting this forum as a safe place to debate the issues without getting called an idiot or cursed out.

    We’re certainly not afraid of any of you.

    Let’s end this now and get back to the debate at hand.

    Thank you,
    Moderator (not Stu)

  90. Alex said

    😀 Thanks TruthTalkLive (not Stu)

  91. Boris said

    Alex,
    I don’t think the moderator (not Stu) would tell me my ideas were thought provoking or inciteful if he (I think) or the people he’s working for were afraid of me. I think they’re trying to be neutral simply because there are so many diverse opinions being thrown around on this thread. They’d no doubt be just as quick to warn any Christian who got out of line about what the ground-rules are.

    I didn’t get on this thread to discuss evolution or creationism. It’s hard to have a conversation with people who claim not to believe in evolution because what they are really saying is that they don’t understand how it works. When someone asks why there are still apes or some of the other questions creationists ask, they are showing that they haven’t read what scientists write about evolution but only what other creationists have written. Why anyone would pay any attention to what people with a clear religious agenda write about science is beyond the scope of my imagination. Unless they just simply do NOT want to learn the truth.

  92. Boris: I don’t think the moderator (not Stu) would tell me my ideas were thought provoking or inciteful if he (I think) or the people he’s working for were afraid of me. I think they’re trying to be neutral simply because there are so many diverse opinions being thrown around on this thread. They’d no doubt be just as quick to warn any Christian who got out of line about what the ground-rules are.

    Moderator (not Stu): Very well said. You hit it on the head.

    Thank you.

  93. Boris said

    It isn’t really science that creationists are “afraid” of and it isn’t God that atheists or scientific humanists are afraid of, despite the rhetoric we read and hear from either side. The battle between these two camps is a battle between two American cultures with opposing worldviews. For creationists it is really the struggle between materialism and spirituality, religion and Godlessness. For the other side it is a struggle between scientific progress and ignorance.

    If the New Testament writers had been told about evolution I don’t think they would have had much of a problem with it. They would likely only be concerned that the major premises of their religion were still accepted. In today’s world telling a young person that the Earth is only 6000 years old and that most of the scientists in the world are either buffoons are involved in a 150 year old conspiracy to destroy Christianity isn’t going to fly very often. Expecting them to believe anything about Jesus after hearing that is a little too much to ask in the 21rst century.

  94. Maz said

    Boris: ”The battle between these two camps is a battle between two American cultures with opposing worldviews.”

    Excuse me Boris, but I am not American…..America is not the only country in the world that has believers in God or Creation.

    And I for one DO understand what the evolutionist says about how evolution works, I’v heard them enough, and read much of so-called sciences theories of evolution, not just the Creationist view.
    Their rhetoric doesn’t convince me of evolution, any more than it appears that we Creationists convince you of Creationism.

  95. Bob Griffin said

    86 Boris

    You are wrong Charles Darwin breath. I have read a lot about the theory of evolution. I just cant keep up with all your changes. We see apes and humans. Apes should be extinct once humans take over based on your theory. Since it doesnt work out that way, you come up with the common ancestor. The theory of evolution is always evolving to fit your needs. No debate on the fossils? Ill start with a specific example tonite and see what you think.

    Still trying to get a question answered. Maybe you in your superior knowledge can help. Both Darwin and myself wonder where are all the living transitional forms? Whats your answer? (Chris C and FLA dont answer. Im looking for maybe a different response.)

  96. Maz said

    Bob: The ape and man evolution thing won’t work with the evolutionist because they believe that the apes around today are an off-shoot of another ape branch….different to the supposed branch that we evolved from. But that still begs the question, where are the missing links between the apes (we supposedly evolved from) and us? They will give you a list of homo’s and Austri’s etc. but they are either real apes or real man….no inbetween fossils exist.
    That goes for the transitional forms aswell, which they think they have an abundance of evidence…but they too are open to interpretation. It all depends on what world view you come from. Science has the answer but it all depends from which direction you are looking at it.
    The truth is out there somewhere! 😉

  97. F. L. A. said

    I’d get John to answer, Bob, but then he’d just say what I would.
    And you misunderstood the explanation Boris tried to give you about the ancestry of apes and humans. Humans evolved WITH them. Humans did lead to the extinction of many ape species, but why do you think that the rise of humanity would lead to the extinction of ALL apes?

    Maz, your “logic” does not help your argument.
    Humans are a form of ape, believe it or not.

  98. Maz said

    F.L.A: I’m only saying what I have heard evolutionists say about how we have apes and man together today. And I did say that evolutionists believe we came from apes….and camr from a separate branch on the tree from the apes of today.

  99. John said

    Not “apes” Maz, an ape-like ancestor, hence the idea of humans evolving with present day apes.
    We gave you lists of examples of those “missing links”, and both Chris C. and Boris above gave excellent examples of past transitional forms.THEY ARE UNDENIABLE AS EVIDENCE.They are not really that open for interpretation.
    Except by people like you[grin].
    Your belief that these “missing links” of humanity can be either all ape or all man[which is rather odd to state, really, as humans ARE a type of ape. It’s like discussing the evolution of Moray Eels and refusing evidence presented with the claim that transitional forms are either all eel or all fish.] are effecting your ability to recognize evidence for what it is.

  100. Boris said

    Bob,
    You are wasting your time trying to prove something Darwin said was wrong. Darwin thought present day humans are descended from Cro-Magnons, something we now know is not true. There are plenty of living transitional species. These animals are “on the way” to becoming “more advanced” animals, something often said impossible by creationists.

    Fish to amphibians
    -Mudskippers (Periopthalmus, et al.) these ray-finned fish are often mistaken for a frog or salamander. They take the land-venturing behaviour of Gobies to a whole new level, actually living most of their lives on land. They present several shocking adaptations to this behaviour.

    Anatomical and behavioural adaptations that allow them to move effectively on land as well as in the water.

    The ability to breathe through their skin and the lining of their mouth (the mucosa) and throat (the pharynx). This is only possible when the mudskipper is wet, limiting mudskippers to humid habitats and requiring that they keep themselves moist. This mode of breathing, similar to that employed by amphibians, is known as cutaneous air breathing. Another important adaptation that aids breathing are their enlarged gill chambers, where they retain air. These act like a scuba diver’s oxygen cylinders, and supply oxygen for respiration also while on land.

    Digging of deep burrows in soft sediments that allow the fish to thermoregulate; avoid marine predators during the high tide when the fish and burrow are submerged; and for laying their eggs. Even when their burrow is submerged, mudskippers maintain an air pocket inside it, which allows them to breathe in conditions of very low oxygen concentration.

    Walking catfish, walking perches, Snakeheads
    (Clarias; Ctenopoma, et al, Channa, et al respectively)
    All these fish are capable of transversing across land, using their pectoral fins to “walk”.

    Land Catfish http://www.planetcatfish.com
    Living in damp leaf litter, this is the only fish known to live solely on land.

    Others
    Flying Fish Exocoetidae
    While not truly flying this creature demonstrates how a small morphological change equals big progress. Basically my point is, fish can glide, as can reptiles.

    Freshwater Hatchet Fish Gasteropelecidae
    These fish are capable of powered flight, through a greatly enlarged sternal region. The flight is used very effectively to escape predators.

    Domino Damselfish Dascyllus trimaculatus
    These fish are closely related, and ancestral to, the popular “clownfish” and are capable of “double lives”. They can either inhabit an anemone, or not. They aren’t forced to as clownfish are, and other species of damselfish such as the striped chromis (Neoglyphiodon) are also recorded as spontaneously “making the switch”. The point being, damselfish are transitions in that they represent a link between regular ray-finned fish that will be stung by an anemone, and clownfish that must live in one to survive.

    Egg laying mammals, Monotremata
    These are mammals. That lay eggs, and have no teats (but produce milk that oozes from pores). Those are common characteristics of reptiles. Yet, they are warm blooded, and have different types of teeth, the latter a characteristic found only in mammals. They are therefore intermediate species.

    Triggerfish, Balistidae
    If one were to compare the order Tetraodontiformes with other ray-finned fish, one would see that triggers are intermediates between those two.

    Puffers power their swim with pectoral, dorsal, and anal fins (latter two unique among tetraodonts), and not so much with caudal fins. They also lack rib bones, and have no spiny rays in their fins.

    Triggers power their swim with pectoral, dorsal, anal, and to get a quick burst of speed, caudal fins. Their rig cage has been reduced to just a single bone, and they only have three spiny rays.

    Most other ray-finned fish swim with mostly caudal or pectoral fins, and most have a full rib cage. Most also have spiny rays, and none otherwise look much like any tetraodonts. The evolution of tetraodonts likely was the result of “advancement through reduction”. However, far from being “primitive”, they are intelligent, quick, and strong fish.

    Legless lizards; Another intermediate.

    Pygopodidae is the family of legless lizards. They are distinguished from snakes by their eyelids that can blink (snakes have no eyelids), external ear holes (snakes have no ears at all, internal or external), and flat, non-forked tongues. Many species also feature vestigial limbs, in the form of scaly flaps.

  101. Bob Griffin said

    Maz,

    I agree. They come up with another offshoot but then cant find it. Thats typical. Then the theory says that 1 species exterminates another, then wonder why I question why the apes are here.

    Humans are a form of ape – no, I dont believe it.

  102. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Ill have some fossil info for you tomorrow. Those are not transitional species. Many animals are suited for several environments. They still stay the same, they dont transition. Remember, Darwin is Macro evolution.

  103. Boris said

    Bob Griffin,
    I gave you examples of living transitional species just as you requested. How did I know you would look right at them and claim they aren’t really there? The same way I know a creationist can look through a telescope at light coming from billions of years ago and claim THAT isn’t really there either or fossils from millions of years ago and claim they aren’t but a few centuries old at most. You people come from the same brand of religion that has vehemently denied every scientific discovery that has been made for the last 2000 years, even those made by other Christians! Bob, you people aren’t kidding anyone. It isn’t just evolution you have a problem with. It’s just about every area of science there is including cosmology, geology, zoology, oceanography (which not only implicitly supports an old earth but debunks the flood tale), archaeology, astronomy, biology (of course), anthropology, physics, cell theory… need I continue? People like you wish to rewrite everything in the public school science books to conform to the superstitions of your particular religion.

    The misconception about the lack of transitional fossils comes from trying to put things in specific categories. When people think about a category like a cat or a dog they often mistakenly believe that there is a well-defined boundary around the category, or that there is some eternal ideal form which defines the category. This kind of thinking leads people to declare that Archaeopteryx is “100% bird,” when it is clearly a mix of bird and reptile features (with more reptile than bird features, in fact). In truth, these categories are man-made and therefore artificial. Nature doesn’t have any specific categories and it is not constrained to ours.

    There are other living examples of transitional species, notably elephants. The African elephant and Indian elephants are completely different genuses and species.

    Zebras are another case– there’s five different species, and they have different numbers of chromosomes. Another example are fish and arthropods living in caves — they’re the same as the species living outside the caves but have lost their eyes and melanistic pigmentation.

  104. Maz said

    John: Evolutionists SAY that we are a type of ape…..but if the Bible has any authority atall, that goes against what God Himself said and, I must repeat, the evidence, which is very much open to interpretation. Human nature as it is, can make someone believe anything if they can twist the truth as far as possible to fit their beliefs.
    Christians trust God and His Word for the truth they believe, what has a man without God got other than his own interpretation of so-called evidence for evolution?
    And it’s not odd if I believe God created us in His image….not an apes. 😉

  105. Maz said

    So-called ‘transitional forms’ are just different kinds of animals that LOOK similar, that doesn’t mean that they actually came FROM each other, or evolved from each other. When you have a creator of anything, you will see a similar design in what he makes. A painting even though not signed can be recognised by it’s style, and the painter can be known.
    A car, a building…..anything that has a creator, contains a style used by that creator.
    So it is with God. He designed and made everything the way it is, in all it’s similarities and it’s varieties. Similarity in design and creation does not prove evolution. And there are LIVING FOSSILS that also reveal that there are animals that do not change over time.
    And in the beginning God created animals in ‘kinds’…..groups or whatever name you want to use….there ARE boundaries between animal groups which they can’t cross over, or they would produce mutated offspring which would invariably be sterile.

  106. Bob Griffin said

    Boris

    Wasting your time trying to prove Darwin wrong? This from a man who put many of his doubts in his book – things that staggered him to think of. He uses words like suppose and assume hundreds of times in his book. And you blindly believe that – that takes more faith than a Christian.

    The transitional forms you listed are still the same as they were thousands of years ago. Darwin posited MACRO evolution. Thats what we want to see.

    When I get home tonight Ill give you some examples to show you your smug assertion about religion doubting science.

    I was looking over the Biology book used in NC high schools last nite. It shows the supposed evolutionary skull sequence that proves the ape to man theory. The caption says that scientists dont agree on the exact sequence of the transition. So even your evolutionist buddies cant agree on the fossils that you tell me are a slam dunk case. Told you they could be interpreted differently – even by non christians.

  107. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Got a proposition about one of your points: dating of fossils.

    I propose that we get a fossil, and each of us takes one arm from it. We each take it to a different lab full of your evolutionist buddies, and have them date it for us. Maybe even classify it too for extra fun. Think we’ll get the same results?

    Elephants and zebras? Thats micro.

  108. Boris said

    Bob Griffin,
    I have a better proposition. Why don’t you take all your proofs against evolution down to the national Academy of Sciences and pick up your Nobel Prize for science? Then of course you will become instantly rich and famous too. You’re not going to do that though, and neither is anyone else. If you only knew how hopeless your case really is then you would also find out how hard the rest of the world is laughing at you. If someone could disprove even a tiny bit of evolutionary theory that would have been done a long time ago. A person like you claiming to understand ancient Hebrew poetry is about the most ridiculous concept on this. Not only is evolution way over your head so is your Bible Bob. He haven’t a clue about either. Keep posting. Your posts reflect the kind of scientific imbecility that is priceless. The things you come up with in your tortured narrow mind are absolutely hilarious. ROFL!

  109. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    The NAS is populated w atheists. Wouldnt work.

    Most of us have the good sense to admit that neither evolution nor creation can be proven with 100% certainty ( are you a member of MENSA?) Since you seem to be absolutely certain that you are right all the time, I hope you will look forward to my response to your slamming of Christians and science. You will be surprised and wrong. Then Ill be laughing at you.

  110. Alex said

    Where is the science behind ID? Boris has done a great deal of explaining the science of Evolution and how it works. What do Christians have to say “We think our observations of the world would lead us to believe that evolution does not happen, and that the world was designed.” Do you just say Evolution is wrong, or do you have proof yourself? And don’t say the bible, or I’ll punch you.

  111. alexmyhereo said

    Post#110,

    “or I’ll punch you.”

    I don’t care who you are, that was funnnnnyyyyy 🙂

    Reading Alex’s posts just thrills my day. Every time I need a good laugh, I’ll just search for Alex’s posts.

    Maturity is a quality that Alex doesn’t have at this moment in time 😉

  112. Maz said

    Boris: The problem is, that even when scientists with letters after their name who are also Christians, show you that evolution is wrong you wouldn’t believe it or accept it because of your preconceived ideas and beliefs in evolution. If we show you the science, it wouldn’t change your belief system one iota. And ofcourse, we don’t accept yours either, because we trust our scientists far more than yours. After all ours have a relationship with God and a conscience towards Him that will not allow them to be deceitful. (That is, the true believers who think truth is more important than trying to prove themselves right when they aren’t). Ofcourse you won’t agree with this anyway, to you they’re all liars, all imbeciles, all ignorant and all crazy.
    But Boris, have you any letters after your name?

  113. Alex – please work on your delivery. “Or I’ll punch you” is not going to go over well here.

    Thank you,
    Moderator (not Stu)

  114. F. L. A. said

    I was not aware that you knew exactly what the appearance of the Christian God looked like, Maz.
    How does he wear his hair?

  115. Maz said

    Really F.L.A…;-)…. When Jesus (Who is God in the flesh) came to earth, He had hair like any other human being. God the Father is Spirit….He only made a physical appearance in and through His Son. And don’t forget the Bible says that we are created in His image. He certainly isn’t a grandfather figure with white hair and a long beard, but there are places in the Bible where the appearence of the Son of God is discribed, especially in Revelation….there it does say that ”His head and his hair were white like wool, as white as snow”…it also says that ”His eyes were like a flame of fire”, so His appearance there was of Jesus in His glory.

  116. Alex said

    I’m not actually going to punch anyone. I’m a lover, not a fighter.

    Also, you’re welcome. I try to bring a little humor to this board. Ya’ll can be a little uptight. 😀

  117. Alex said

    and Maz. Of all the things in all the universe, why would god possibly want to look like an old guy with flaming eyes. Whoever wrote that was on entirely too much salvia.

  118. Maz said

    Alex: He didn’t look like ”an old guy”, He looked like the glorified Son of God that He was.
    And John was not on any alcaholic beverage when he wrote it either.

  119. Maz said

    Alex: Jesus is God, the manifestation in the physical of the Godhead…Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And I know you’re going to say He was the Son so how can He be the Father and the Holy Spirit…..but Jesus, in the flesh, was the Son of God, yet the Father and the Spirit dwelt within Him. He was the manifestation of the Godhead bodily as the Bible tells us in Coll: 2 v 9.

  120. Alex said

    The holy trinity idea was made by someone who was bad at math.

  121. Maz said

    Dear me Alex, where do you get this all from?

  122. Alex said

    300% = 1 is bad math. Unless 300% = 3, but then you’re polytheist. OR 100% = 1, then Jesus isn’t god, and the holy spirit isn’t real, its god. I’m inclined to think that 0% = 0, and there are no god(s).

  123. Maz said

    Alex: Do you drink water? It’s one substance that comes pouring out of your tap, but actually it’s three…..H20. 2 parts hydrogen and one part oxygen……but for water to be water it has to have all three parts. God is Spirit, so there is an element that is unknowable….unless you have a knowable element to make the unknwable known. 8)

  124. F. L. A. said

    But Maz, two of those three parts that make up water are still the same.
    Alex the answer is rooted in a form of polytheism. It comes from a time when “GOD” was seen a triple “Goddess”.
    The early Christians had a history of borrowing things from other theological belief systems and incorporating them into their own, as the ancient Roman pagans did with the Greeks deities.

  125. Boris said

    Bob Griffin,
    You said: The NAS is populated w atheists. Wouldnt work.

    Boris says: Sure Bob. Why do you think the most brilliant people in the world are atheists Bob?

    You said: Most of us have the good sense to admit that neither evolution nor creation can be proven with 100% certainty ( are you a member of MENSA?)

    Boris says: That is false. Creation science is in fact testable, tentative, and falsifiable. For example, it predicts a young Earth and other geological facts that have, in fact, been falsified. The claims if the primary design theorists William Dembski and Michael Behe have been thoroughly refuted and in some case falsified.

  126. Boris said

    Maz you said: Boris: The problem is, that even when scientists with letters after their name who are also Christians, show you that evolution is wrong you wouldn’t believe it or accept it because of your preconceived ideas and beliefs in evolution.

    Boris says: Your problem is that no scientists, Christians or otherwise, have yet been able to show anyone that “evolution is wrong” as you put it. If anyone could do it they would because it would be the most important discovery of the last few centuries. It would mean a Nobel Prize, fame and fortune and a place in history for whatever scientist could accomplish this. But it’s like trying to prove the world is immovable like the Bible implicitly says it is. How come you aren’t trying to prove that? It’s in the Bible so it must be true right?

    You said: If we show you the science, it wouldn’t change your belief system one iota. And of course, we don’t accept yours either, because we trust our scientists far more than yours.

    Boris says: What scientists are you speaking of exactly? The hoaxers Discovery Institute which gets a tax exemption because it is registered as a “non-scientific” religious organization? So do the other creation organizations. They are all listed with the IRS as ‘non-scientific.” Yet these are the people you get your ideas about science from.

    You said: After all ours have a relationship with God and a conscience towards Him that will not allow them to be deceitful. (That is, the true believers who think truth is more important than trying to prove themselves right when they aren’t). Ofcourse you won’t agree with this anyway, to you they’re all liars, all imbeciles, all ignorant and all crazy.
    But Boris, have you any letters after your name?

    Boris says: So Kent Hovind, a leading creation “scientist” who went to Federal Prison on about 48 different tax fraud charges and who has also been exposed as a liar with 300 of his lies posted and refuted on the Internet, could not have been deceitful? The rest the other creationist spokesman have been shown to be extremely dishonest, mining quotes and misquoting real scientists to try to make a case for their pseudo-science. It isn’t just evolutionary biologists that you have a problem with either. Cosmologists, geologists, anthropologists, zoologists, physicists, chemists, astronomers, archaeologists and even liberal Bible scholars all tell us things you disagree with to. You are so far removed from reality and any clue about real science.

  127. Barney said

    “God is Spirit, so there is an element that is unknowable….unless you have a knowable element to make the unknowable known.”

    Classic! You’ve outdone yourself, Maz!

  128. Boris said

    Barney scientists attempt the explain the unknown in terms of the known. What people like Maz are attempting to do is explain the known with the unknown. The mumbo-jumbo creationists use to do this is truly entertaining though.

  129. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Heres a small list for you. These would be scientists who were Christians. Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Brahe, Descartes, Boyle, Newton, Pascal, Ampere, Pasteur and Mendel. Newton looked at his discoveries as showing the genius of Gods handiwork. This would prove your earlier smug diatribe as wrong.

  130. Barney said

    I think I’ve got it, now, Maz!

    Let me try one: Remember in the old Disney movie “Cinderella”, when the Fairy God Mother uses a magic spell to make her magic? If one listens closely, one realizes that the magic spell is actually three words!

    Bibitty, Bobitty, Boo!

    So although it’s ONE magic spell, it’s made up of three parts!!!

  131. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Speaking of hoaxes – how many evolutionist examples would you like? Piltdown, Nebraska, etc. Since they had them, that also disqualifies all atheist/evolutionary dogma, right?
    Lets talk about dating you rely on to prove your points. A test was done to verify rock dating. Samples were taken from the years 1949-1975. 13 were sent at different times to a lab. Heres the results: 4 dated less than 270,000 yrs, 1 less than 290,000 yrs, 1 at 800,000 yrs, 3 at 1,000,000 yrs, 1 at 1.2 mil yrs, 1 at 1.3 mil yrs, 1 at 1.5 mil yrs and 1 at 3.5 million yrs. All were from 25-51 years old. I guess the creationists tricked those genius pinhead atheists you referred to earlier. And just think, they had a range of over 3 million years apart. I wish I was as smart as those guys.

  132. Maz said

    F.L.A: EVERY Person of the Trinity is the same in essencce actually….GOD.
    You still need those two ‘same’ parts with the other part to make water don’t you?

    And the borrowing was actually around the other way. The Christian God was here first….even Christ was here in the beginning before He ever came to earth.

  133. Maz said

    Boris: The evolutionist scientists havn’t shown me anything that convinces me that evolution is right either. I listened to a scientist who had in the past actually taught in American Universities that evolution was a fact, but now he expounds that the Bibles account of Creation in Genesis is correct. His name….(cos’ I know you’ll ask)…..Dr. Grady McMurty.

    Scientists that are also Christians have tried showing you and other evolutionists that their theory is wrong but you just won’t see it. They have good scientific evidence for what they believe but the evolutionists misconception of millions of years gets in the way.

    Don’t forget Boris, there were hoaxers on the evolutionary side too! It took 40 years for the evolutionist to ‘discover’ that the Piltdown Man was a hoax….among many others! Some SCIENTIST kept quiet about it for nearly 40 years KNOWING it was false.

    Again, there ARE scientists, in Geology, Biology, Physics etc. that ARE qualified to speak about their belief in Creation. Just as there are Christian DOCTORS, which I have proved to
    you before on another blog here and you havn’t come back to me to say that you were wrong about what you said.

    Human nature as it is, there will always be a few bad apples in the proverbial fruit bowl, that does not mean that ALL are dishonest. Don’t paint them all with the same brush….I could do the same with yours.

    I do wonder who is far removed from reality. You have stated some things that are completely untrue, and as I said, I have found there is dishonesty in every walk of life, even in Chritianity…..yes, wherever humans are, there is sin…..but those who truly follow God want to live a pure, honest life, and I believe that a majority try to do that today.
    Don’t generalise. Just because a few are black pots, doesn’t make everyone black. That goes for evolutionists too. I do believe there are sincere people on BOTH sides, I do not label all evolutionists (for example) as liars, just the ones that I know have not been honest with their so-called scientific knowledge. Many are simply deceived….I was once…it’s all I heard in school about our beginnings. Evolution had free reign in the classroom, there was no other alternative but to believe what your teachers were teaching you about our origins. Evolution was FACT to them, and no doubt many of them were simply teaching what the school told them to teach and what evolutionist scientist information they were given in the curriculum.

  134. Boris said

    Bob Griffin,
    Boy Bob, you really shot yourself in the foot with this list of “Christian” scientists. They may have been Christian, but everyone of these scientist’s discoveries was vehemently denied by the Church and fundamentalist Christians just like you. Flat-Earther Martin Luther gives us an example of the Christian acceptance of the discoveries of these men:

    “People give ear to an upstart astrologer [Copernicus]who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy.”

    [Martin Luther, Works, Volume 22, c. 1543]

    “In the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the Scriptures, but with experiments, and demonstrations.” – Galileo Galilei

    Do you agree with that statement by Galileo Bob? Of course you don’t, you believe the Bible is only basis for doing any science. So you people are still disagreeing with Galileo to this very day!

    Bob why does every CHRISTIAN college and university in the world with a science department teach evolution and common descent? How come you can’t sell your religious hoax as science to your own academic community.?

    And Bob, a person like you who believes in the childish and ridiculous fables you do shouldn’t be calling other people pin heads.

  135. Boris said

    Maz said: The Christian God was here first….even Christ was here in the beginning before He ever came to earth.

    Boris says: Where is YOUR evidence for THIS absurd statement? Let’s see Jesus was here and then he turned himself into a zygote so he could be born. What’s the point if he was already here? Then Jesus sacrifices himself to himself and if we BELIEVE that we get to live happily ever after in a magic happyland! How can I believe this? I can’t stop laughing at how silly it all is.

  136. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    I own several guns, and I have not shot myself in the foot. I will have more info on that tonight. And even if some disagreed with them then, they agree now. Big deal. How many evolutionists disagree on the date or classification of a fossil? Then change their mind several times.

    Speaking of flat earthers, the Bible talks about it being round. Did you know that?

    I just used pinheads to show you how your style looks when used by others. Maybe you could debate without making personal insults. How about that rock test? How could your evolutionist buddies have 50 yr old samples dated from 270,000 – 3.5 million years?

  137. Maz said

    Boris: You call other people childish….among other things…then you act childishly yourself.
    Your profoundly ignorant and absurd statements do not even really deserve an intelligent answer. #135.

    There weren’t any real flat earthers, it was something made up by a fictional writer which just caught on in other peoples imagination. And Bob is right, the Bible teaches that the earth is a globe, a sphere….even the Greeks knew this.

    And where do you get all this very incorrect information from? ”EVERY college and University in the world with a science department teach evolution and common decent”.
    ABSOLUTELY FALSE! Have you been to them all? Have you researched this thoroughly?
    Some there may be that believe in theistic evolution, but many fundementalist Colleges teach the Bible……or are you just talking about America?

    Do not expect me to answer your questions when you havn’t answered mine.

    The sad thing is, Boris, that your attitude towards God and Christians will lead you headlong down into a lost eternity…..it really isn’t somewhere you would want to end up….and you can’t blame God because you don’t believe He exists.

  138. JT Bridges said

    Alex #76 says,
    “Men create gods after their own image, not only with regard to their form but with regard to their mode of life.” – Aristotle (c. 384-322 BCE).

    I love this quote.
    ———————–

    I have an affinity for Aristotle and St. Thomas’ philosophical theology. This quote actually strengthens the veracity of Christian theism. In every major religion that I am aware of the “mode of life” of the deity is something very familiar to human experience (e.g. the Greek/Roman pantheons, or many of the Hindu gods). In Christianity, however, God’s mode of being is so far removed from familiar human experience that it strikes one as possibly a revelation from another realm (not just the flights of human imagination). An Infinite, Eternal Spirit living with Himself in Triune relationship, whose nature (the “What”) is the very act of existing (latin: esse)…this is not your average god.

    So, thank you Alex for posting an interesting quote that contradicts the point you intended.

    I know this was a digression from the creationism discussion; by all means continue.

  139. F. L. A. said

    Bob, the Bible speaks of the earth as being round, true, but not SPHERICAL. Round as in a round shaped table top. That’s bullet #2[For today at least]. Could you give us the names, locations, and dates of those involved with this faulty rock dating test, for verification?

    Maz, you actually believe that nothing from other theological belief systems was borrowed and/or assimilated by early Christianity? Are you suuuuuuuurrrre?
    We could give you examples.We could start with the holidays. I’d love to tell you the symbolic significance behind the Roman Cross that Christians adopted as the world wide symbol of their theology and are so fond of wearing, but I can’t, as it would probably be deemed to obscene.

  140. Sorry, JT. Alex is no longer with us. He recently became the 3rd person to be banned from this site in the 2 years of its’ existence. We’re not proud of having to do that, but sometimes people leave us no choice.

    Moderator (not Stu)

  141. Maz said

    F.L.A: I know that Constantine mixed some pagan celebrations into the Christian calendar, but I don’t personally accept any pagan rituals. At Christmas I celebrate the birth of my Savior, and at Easter…(which word I don’t like to use because of it’s pagan connections)…I celebrate the death and resurrection of my Savior. I don’t like Easter eggs or Easter bunnies, or such traditions that are really nothing to do with true Christianity.

    To me the cross reminds me of Christs suffering for me. Maybe it wasn’t a cross shape, maybe it was a T shape, it really doesn’t matter what shape it was, though I do wear a cross because it represents Jesus agonising death for me. Crucifixions were common at that time, it was the most excruciating way to die….crucifixion, meaning that a cross was involved.
    Justus Lipsius in his book De Cruce Liber Primus has drawings of many shapes of crosses and stakes but says, ”In the Lord’s cross there were four pieces of wood, the upright beam, the crossbar, a tree trunk (piece of wood) placed below, and the title (inscription) placed above.” Pg. 47. I don’t have any other information about him, but he must have been some historian.
    The Jehovahs Witnesses ofcourse make a big point of saying that it wasn’t a cross it was a stake, but ignores the fact that the Bible tells us that there were nails, not a nail, but nails pierced his hands, one in each.

    But what is important is not the shape of the cross or stake but what happened there…..Jesus died in agony to pay the price for our sin. He died in our place so that we might be free from the punishment for our sin.

  142. F. L. A. said

    Maz, there really are “Flat Earthers”. Have you never heard of the Flat Earth Society? If not, and if your in the mood for a little fun reading, then just type in “The Flat Earth Society” within your search and see what you can discover.Do be sure to visit their home page for an example of the “scientific evidence” that they have to support their views about the flat earth sitting at the center of this universe with everything else revolving around it…..[siiiigh].
    Yes, even in this age.
    And if you think that they sound silly, well, now you may have an idea about how we educated evolutionists feel in regards to the “scientific evidences” used by The Ken Hams of this world.
    Then again, perhaps they WILL make a lot of good sense to you.However for your sake, I hope that they do not.

  143. Boris said

    Bob,
    You said: I own several guns, and I have not shot myself in the foot. I will have more info on that tonight.

    Boris says: What do you need all those guns for. If someone breaks in to steal your TV would you give them your coat too, like Jesus said to, or would you just shoot the guy?

    You said: And even if some disagreed with them then, they agree now. Big deal. How many evolutionists disagree on the date or classification of a fossil? Then change their mind several times.

    Boris says: Well scientists change their minds all the time because science is not always exact. Religious people on the other hand, are not allowed to change their minds about matters what they’ve been told to believe by other people.

    Speaking of flat earthers, the Bible talks about it being round. Did you know that?

    Boris says: Actually it says: “It is he who sits above the circle of the earth… who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to live in” (Isa 40:22). This verse clearly implies a flat circle with the heaven attached above as described in Enoch.

    You said: I just used pinheads to show you how your style looks when used by others. Maybe you could debate without making personal insults. How about that rock test? How could your evolutionist buddies have 50 yr old samples dated from 270,000 – 3.5 million years?

    Boris says: I haven’t made any personal insults and the moderator (not Stu) warned me and some other people against such things recently. You called me “Charles Darwin breath” which only proved you already lost our little debate anyway. A 50 year old rock? Sure Bob. What are you using, those superbly accurate “biblical” dating methods? How DO those work Bob?

  144. Boris said

    Maz said: Boris: You call other people childish….among other things…then you act childishly yourself.
    Your profoundly ignorant and absurd statements do not even really deserve an intelligent answer. #135.

    Boris says: Why don’t you just admit you have no answer that would sound intelligent even to you?

    Maz said: There weren’t any real flat earthers, it was something made up by a fictional writer which just caught on in other peoples imagination. And Bob is right, the Bible teaches that the earth is a globe, a sphere….even the Greeks knew this.

    Boris says: The Greeks knew a lot of things but thanks to angry Christian mobs most of what they knew was destroyed in massive and brutal book burning campaigns. This culminated in the burning of the Alexandria library by angry Christians which inaugurated the Dark Ages, or the the time when Christianity ruled most of the world.

    Maz said: And where do you get all this very incorrect information from? ”EVERY college and University in the world with a science department teach evolution and common decent”.
    ABSOLUTELY FALSE! Have you been to them all? Have you researched this thoroughly?

    Boris says: Yes I have. I never knew much about evolution until I went to a Christian college. That’s how come I know so much about it. We just looked at plants and cut open dead animals in high school biology. Name one Christian university that teaches science that doesn’t. It really bothers you that the Christian academic community rejects your beliefs about creation doesn’t it? Printing in all caps will not make what you type true. It isn’t.

    Maz said: Some there may be that believe in theistic evolution, but many fundementalist Colleges teach the Bible……or are you just talking about America?

    Boris says: There aren’t any fundamentalist colleges teaching any science anywhere. That isn’t what they do and you should know that.

    Maz said: Do not expect me to answer your questions when you havn’t answered mine.

    Boris says: I’ve responded to every point you’ve made and answered all your questions as anyone on this thread can clearly see.

    Maz said: The sad thing is, Boris, that your attitude towards God and Christians will lead you headlong down into a lost eternity…..it really isn’t somewhere you would want to end up….and you can’t blame God because you don’t believe He exists.

    Boris says: When a Christian knows they’ve lost another argument they cannot resist a desperate threat that their God will punish me for not believing what they do. That is setting an awful high price on my opinions which I happen to know are not important to anyone but myself. Same as yours are Maz.

  145. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    The Greeks and Christians knew the earth was round.
    The bible doesnt say the sun revolves around the earth.
    Galileo told the church he would not teach heliocentrism. He broke his word. He was not charged w heresy. He continued experiments.

    If somebody broke into my house, I would do the sensible thing and shoot him. Common sense prevails.

    Science is not exact? Then how can you be so sure of all your assertions?

    Too tired tonite to look it up, but the bible says its round.

    As for Charles Darwin breath, reread your earlier posts. I was reviving Johnny Carson in response to your calling me and others imbecile, buffoon etc. I didnt lose the debate, I was just stooping down to your level.

    Good guess on the rocks, but very wrong. Shouldnt be so smug w/out thinking a little. The rocks were made by a live volcano, so the date was obvious. They watched them form. Much more reliable than an evolutionist assuming millions of years.

  146. Bob Griffin said

    FLA

    I will get you the info tomorrow. Do the same on the finches for me.

  147. Maz said

    F.L.A: Flat earth belief DID start as fiction, but there’s always someone who will have the imagination to make something of it. We have photo’s from space of the earth, so we DO have proof of that. We don’t however have photos of Creation but we DO have evidence which is no way to be compared with the ‘flat earthers’ beliefs. They would only have to go up in an aeroplane to see the curve of the horizan to know it’s not flat.

  148. Maz said

    Boris: ”It really bothers you that the Christian academic community rejects your beliefs about creation doesn’t it?” It bothers me that some are teaching evolution……to think that Christians can put so-called science above the Bible is quite sad.
    But then you said: ”There aren’t any fundamentalist colleges teaching any science anywhere. That isn’t what they do and you should know that.” Now it seems you are saying that these colleges DON’T teach science..? If they are teaching evolution I guess they aren’t!

    It’s strange but I knew you would see my last line as a THREAT. But a threat it deffinitely was not. It is a FACT. And it is a sad fact Boris. If you warn a child that they will burn their finger in the fire if they keep playing with it, would you call that a threat? No, you would call that a warning. There is a difference. You aren’t making the child burn it’a finger, they are doing it themselves through disobedience and rebellion.

    And when I said about not answering all my questions I was really talking about another thread….the ‘Trust the Bible?’ thread…..you had gone quiet on me about Christian doctors…..maybe going quiet was your way of dealing with losing an argument?

  149. Maz said

    Boris: “It is he who sits above the circle of the earth… who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to live in” (Isa 40:22).
    You said: This verse clearly implies a flat circle with the heaven attached above as described in Enoch.
    God knew before we did…for He created the earth….that is was a globe, that is why He wrote that verse…He knew it wasn’t a flat circle (so He wouldn’t have meant a flat circle!). Your reasoning is flawed. And we know now that it is a globe…’hanging upon nothing’ as another verse tells us. I think that sounds pretty accurate scientifically.

  150. Maz said

    F.L.A: I found this little bit of info on one of the ‘flat earth’ web sites: ”There was once an organization called the Flat Earth Society that asserted that the earth is flat and that space travel is a hoax. If you Google “flat earth society” you will find some assorted links, but all of them appear to be joke sites. I could find no Web presence of a serious Flat Earth Society, perhaps because acknowledging that the Internet exists would confirm that the Earth is a sphere.
    Good point!

  151. Maz said

    Truth Talk: I hope this isn’t too long, but Boris did insist there were NO colleges teaching Creation Science. So here goes:

    For Boris:

    Colleges & Universities that believe or teach Biblical Creation Philosophy.

    A few private colleges offer courses and even full degrees in creation sciences, and likewise graduate programs are available leading to Masters and Doctorates. The Seventh-day Adventist universities are probably the most common of any Christian schools to incorporate young-earth creation teaching into their curriculum. However, the best accredited graduate-level education in creation science is unquestionably through the Institute for Creation Research Graduate School located in the upper San Diego River valley in Santee, California.

    Adonai International Bible College & Theological Seminary – Sacramento CA
    Albuquerque Bible College and Graduate Theological Institute – Albuquerque NM
    Apologia: Free Apologetics Courses by the Creation Research and Apologetics Society of India
    Appalachian Bible College Bradley, WV
    Azusa Pacific University Azusa, CA
    Center for Research in Science Azusa Pacific University
    Baptist Bible College Clarks Summit, PA
    Bahnsen Theological Seminary Placentia, CA
    Bryan College
    Center for Origins Research (CORE)
    Creation anti-Evolution Literature Database
    Biola University Los Angeles, CA. Offers M.A. in Religion and Science, and has active interest in Intelligent
    Design.
    Bob Jones University Greenville, SC
    Courses in the Division of Natural Science
    Creation College Established in 2004 by the Answers in Genesis Ministry to Provide Basic Training for Creation Speakers
    Bryan College – Dayton, TN
    The Center for Origins Research and Education (C.O.R.E) The purpose of the CORE is to develop and promote a Biblical perspective of origins through teaching and research.
    Calvary Bible College and Theological Seminary Kansas City, MO
    Calvary Chapel Bible College Murrieta, CA
    Calvin School of Apologetics and Theology Free distance-education in theology, apologetics, and counseling.
    Cedarville University Cedarville, OH Offers many courses which address Creation Science
    Department of Science and Mathematics – Seeks to present the natural sciences and mathematics as disciplines through which students can learn to understand creation and its Creator.
    Christian Heritage College El Cajon, CA
    Clearwater Christian College Clearwater, FL
    Council Mountain College Council, ID
    Coastland Christian Bible College and University Southern California
    Columbia Evangelical Seminary Buckley, WA
    Creation Research Science Education Foundation – Educational Opportunities – Scholarships and Classes at Principia Institute Ohio
    Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary Allen Park, MI
    Freedom Bible College and Seminary Distance Learning & Online Bible Studies
    Emmanuel College of Christian Studies Offers MS and PhD Programs in creation science apologetics.
    Faithway Baptist College Ypsilanti, MI
    God’s Bible School & College Cincinnati, OH
    Grace University Omaha, NE
    Graduate Theological Union Berkeley, CA
    Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary Taylors, SC
    Heart of America Seminary & Bible College Independence, MO
    ICR Graduate School at the Institute for Creation Research Santee, California.
    M.S. degree programs in the fields of Astro/Geophysics, Biology, Geology, and Science Education.
    The Institute for Creation Research is Accredited by the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS), an agency which itself is recognized and approved by the U.S. Department of Education.
    Courses Currently Offered
    Jackson Hole Bible College Jackson, WY
    Liberty University Lynchburg, VA
    Luther Rice Seminary Lithonia, GA
    Maryland Bible College & Seminary Baltimore, MD
    Master’s Divinity School Program Biblical Creation Apologetics
    The Masters College Santa Clarita, CA
    The Master’s Seminary Sun Valley, CA
    Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary Gemantown, TN
    New Saint Andrews College
    Northwest Theological Seminary Lynnwood, WA
    Oklahoma Baptist University, Natural Science Program
    Ozark Christian College Joplin, MO
    Patrick Henry College Purcellville VA was established as the first college in the nation designed primarily for home schooled students. PHC has been denied accreditation by the American Academy for Liberal Education because they teach literal 6-day creation theory.
    Pensacola Christian College Pensacola, FL
    Pillsbury Baptist Bible College Owatonna, MN
    Reformation International College & Theological Seminary Fellsmere, FL
    Shasta Bible College Redding, CA
    Southeastern Bible College Birmingham, AL
    Southern Methodist College Orangeburg, SC
    Southwestern Adventist University Keene, TX
    Earth History Research Center Southwestern Adventist University Keene, TX
    Graduate Classes
    Undergraduate Classes
    Southwestern College Phoenix, AZ
    Temple Baptist College Cincinnati, OH
    Tennessee Temple University Chattanooga, TN
    The Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences Offers courses at graduate level. An affiliate of the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California.
    The Kings University Alberta Canada
    Torrey Honors Institute Biola University La Mirada CA
    Tri-State Bible College South Point, OH
    Trinity College Trinity, Florida
    Trinity School of Apologetics & Theology Free Online Graduate Courses (Calvin School of Apologetics)
    Union Bible College Westfield, IN
    Washington Bible College / Capital Bible Seminary Lanham, MD
    Western Bible College Salem, OR
    Word of Life Bible Institute Pottersville, NY
    Other Lists of Creationist Schools
    Colleges and seminaries that teach a literal Genesis by ChristianAnswers.Net
    Colleges and seminaries who teach a literal Genesis Answers in Genesis has accumulated a list of colleges which have submitted a statement of faith in a recent creation.
    Creationist Colleges by Henry Morris. ICR Impact No. 365 November 2003
    Creationist Schools List by Dan Reynolds
    Intelligent Design Colleges by Access Research Network
    What Schools Teach Creationism ICR Impact No. 225. March 1992

  152. F. L. A. said

    What do you want to know in regards to those Finches Bob?

  153. Barney said

    Re: 151

    I’ll take a guess and say that those schools Maz listed are not fully accredited. They would be along the lines of Alex Macfarland’s Southern Evangelical Seminary.

    Now Maz will explain that her schools are just as good as Havard and Princeton and if they lack accreditations it is due entirely to thosee accrediting bodies being populated by atheistic anti-God Darwin worshippers.

  154. Boris said

    Bob G says: The Greeks and Christians knew the earth was round.
    The bible doesnt say the sun revolves around the earth.

    Boris says: Then how did Joshua stop the sun from going across the sky to make the day longer? ROFL! You could not be more wrong!

    Galileo told the church he would not teach heliocentrism. He broke his word. He was not charged w heresy. He continued experiments.

    Bob G says: If somebody broke into my house, I would do the sensible thing and shoot him. Common sense prevails.

    Boris says: Well we are different kinds of people. Christians are violent as history clearly shows and you just proved. I would simply hold the intruder at bay until I called the police and let them handle the situation, which is of course, what the police would want citizens to do. But you live by laws from an ancient holy book and disregard the laws the rest of us voted in place don’t you Bob?

    Bob G says: Science is not exact? Then how can you be so sure of all your assertions? Too tired tonite to look it up, but the bible says its round.

    Boris says: Because science, unlike religion, is self-correcting.

    Bob G says: As for Charles Darwin breath, reread your earlier posts. I was reviving Johnny Carson in response to your calling me and others imbecile, buffoon etc. I didnt lose the debate, I was just stooping down to your level.

    Boris says: Bob, you lost this debate as soon as you claimed the earth was only 6000 years old. There is not a single thing you could use to defend that insane position.

    Bob G says: Good guess on the rocks, but very wrong. Shouldnt be so smug w/out thinking a little. The rocks were made by a live volcano, so the date was obvious. They watched them form. Much more reliable than an evolutionist assuming millions of years.

    Boris says: Do you know anything at all about geology? Rocks don’t just appear out of nothing. The material the rocks are made of is billions of years old.

    Boris says: Let’s get real here Bob. You have no science to defend your beliefs and you know it. Where is YOUR evidence that a witch called up a dead person, that a man killed 1000 well-armed men with the jawbone of an ass, that a man spent three days in the belly of a fish and lived, that giants once inhabited Palestine and they ate giant fruit or that people once lived to be centuries old? Your tired claims that science is too absurd to believe can easily be turned back on your own ridiculous beliefs Bob. Now until you can prove these things actually happened you need to back off absurd claims about a subject you are completely ignorant of and defend your own crazy superstitions. We want PROOF Bob, that what YOU believe is true.

  155. Boris said

    Maz,
    This list you posted is absolutely hilarious! You listed a bunch of theological seminaries not ONE of which has a science department! This is typical of Christians defending a position. As if a list made long enough could disguise the fact that not one of these schools actually teaches any kind of science. Apologists do this same thing when claiming that Jesus Christ actually existed. They compile a long list of historians that supposedly mentioned Jesus Christ as if this long list could disguise the fact that not one of these historians wrote anything in the first century and they are ALL second century historians. Then add to that the fact that just about all of these entries have been proved to be forgeries done by the Church fathers themselves, including the famous golden paragraph in the works of Josephus.

    Maz said: The Institute for Creation Research is Accredited by the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS), an agency which itself is recognized and approved by the U.S. Department of Education.

    Boris says: First of all this claim is NOT true. Second, the ICR is registered with the IRS as a tax exempt ‘non-scientific’ religious organization. The best arguments against creationism are made by the creationists themselves.

  156. Boris said

    Gerardus Bouw heads the association for Biblical Astronomy. He is the leading figure of “modern geocentrism.” This group insists that, as several Bible passages imply, the Earth is the center of the universe and does not move. Here’s how we know the universe revolves around the earth:

    “Historians readily acknowledge that the Copernican Revolution spawned the bloody French and Bolshevic revolutions… set the stage for the [revival of the] ancient Greek dogma of evolution… led to Marxism and Communism… It is thus a small step to total rejection of the Bible and the precepts of morality and law taught therein.”

    “If God cannot be taken literally when he writes [in the Bible] of the rising sun, then how can one insist that he can be taken literally when writing of the rising of the sun.”

    This is the kind of nonsense that Christian homeschooling parents bludgeon their children with. People like Bob Griffin and Maz really do believe this nonsense but are too embarrassed to admit it in public, but only to each other.

  157. Bob Griffin said

    F.L.A.

    I had read there were 13 species of finches then and 13 now. I hadnt seen the number (16?) you had.

    The rock dating was done by the RATE project by Andrew Snelling in Australia.

  158. Boris said

    More Faulty Creation Science from The Institute for Creation Research:

    The Institute for Creation Research is promoting a new research focus aimed at discrediting radiometric dating methods. The group in charge of this recent effort chose the acronym R.A.T.E. (Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth). Their ‘research’ efforts are aimed at discrediting modern geochronologic methods (using flawed experiments as discussed below) and replacing it with some form of miraculous isotopic behavior. So what exactly is the RATE group attempting and who is in charge of the research effort?

    Point #1: Although the RATE group has undertaken a massive fund-raising effort amongst ye-creationists, none of its members has experience or training in experimental geochronology. Two members, Austin and Snelling have written a number of articles in creationist magazines, but neither has published articles using radiometric dating in the mainstream literaturea. Their IMPACT series articles, IMP326, IMP319, IMP309, IMP307, IMP301, IMP224 along with several ‘technical articles’ (eg. St Helen’s Dacite) attempt to discredit radiometric dating based on ‘anomalous’ results. The problem is that the anomalies were all generated via experimental flaws on the part of the investigators or simply misinterpreting technical articles from peer-reviewed scientific literature. Refutations and discussions of these flaws abound (see, for example: Austin Grand Canyon study) and will not be repeated here. The main point to be made is that accurate radiometric dating requires certain analytical care. It’s easy enough to collect a rock and send a check to Geochron Labs and have them produce a ‘date’ (which is exactly what Austin does). It is quite another thing to collect the proper sample, conduct the mineral separations (checking for possible inclusions and overgrowths), do the column chemistry, prepare the bombs and analyze the results. More on this in a moment–because the argument that no member of the RATE group has proper geologic training to conduct the studies is germane to several of their proposals. In fact, far from being an ad-hominem attack, it demonstrates a basic level of misunderstanding on the part of the RATE group that is sure to produce additional bogus science.

    The RATE group proposes the following set of experiments to ‘test’ the validity of modern geochronologic methods. Note that the Group asks for money to conduct the research, but is vague on the specifics. Such a request for funding in the scientific world would be rejected out-of-hand. However, since the foregone conclusions form an integral part of the funding request, I suppose they will reach their goal!! The other problem with the proposed work is that the Group ignores a wealth of modern research and present flawed experiments for other parts. I will address one of their proposals below:
    What about isochron discordance?

    “Increase evidence for discordance among isotopic dating methods using isochrons for mineral components of flood related rocks. Based on the consistency of the discordance from this specimen (a flood gabbro) and others, infer the processes which led to the distribution of isotopes” (taken from ICR 314, see link above)”

    I want to call your attention to several issues regarding their proposal. The first is that the RATE Group has pre-determined that the sample will be discordant (or, in this case will not produce an isochron). Therefore, the RATE Group has already reached their conclusion! Why even do the experiment? No doubt it will produce an imprecise alignment of minerals and whole rocks because of the sample they chose1. Why did they choose a flood gabbro? Although, I cannot be sure about the methods to be used by the RATE Group, I assume that the isochron method of choice will be either K-Ar or the Rb-Sr method simply because they are most affordable. There are a number of ways to produce bad data in geochronology1,2. The easiest is to apply the wrong method to the wrong rocks. A gabbro is not the ideal specimen for Rb-Sr/K-Ar dating (especially if it is a very young gabbro) for two reasons. Both methods rely on the presence of abundant K-bearing minerals (Rb substitutes for K in many minerals due to their similar ionic radii) and gabbros do not typically contain an abundance of K-bearing minerals1. The methods are also not particularly useful for young mafic rocks due to the lengthy half-life of 40K and 87Rb (see table here). That is not to say that these methods CANNOT be applied to mafic rocks, but there are better methods based on the mineralogies present in gabbroic and other mafic rocks (U-Pb on baddelyite for example).

    The second issue has to do with the sample selection itself. The proposal states a conclusion without providing support. The RATE group claims this is a ‘flood-related’ rock! They provide no evidence for the flood nor has any creationist been willing to specify exactly what sequence of rocks represents the flood on earth. Furthermore, a gabbro is an intrusive igneous rock and therefore in order to be identified as ‘flood-related’, it must intrude sedimentary (or other) strata that are considered to be part of the flood. Of course, since these strata have never been formally recognized the argument is specious.

    Bottom Line: The RATE group will produce discordant results because they have guaranteed discordance in their proposal. This does not represent research, it represents a planned confirmation of a faulty hypothesis and can not be called science in any sense of the word.

  159. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Im glad youre looking at the Bible some. What any Bible character did is more plausible than the big bang – how does nothing from nothing give us something?

    You would hold the intruder at bay? Good luck. The Bible tells us all men are sinful. The world looks like thats correct. Some Christians have certainly been very evil, but lets look at our lifetime. Your evolutionist/atheist buddies have killed about 100 million people in the last 100 years. So you answer: would you rather live under Christians or atheists?

    Science is self correcting? Then why are discredited evolutionist experiments still in textbooks today? You would be wrong.

    My insane position is 6000 years old. What is your exact science number for age of the earth? 3 billion to 15 billion years? Thats a fairly substantial difference for an exact science. You can have a 10 to 15 Billion year difference and all these guys are thought of as geniuses.

    The rocks were made when material was spewed from a volcano.

    Glad to see at the end you are at least reading the Bible more than I thought. As Ive stated before, I admit neither of us can prove our position with certainty. I believe the Bible, which had over 60 prophecies come true in the person of Jesus. You believe in an unobservable fairy tale by your atheist friends. Im still waiting on absolute proof of the age of the earth, any fossil, any transition etc. You cant do it. You have to assume. You can observe none of the wild claims from the past. All you can do is observe current day micro evolution and say that proves macro.

  160. Maz said

    Barney # 153: It isn’t worth answering, as you have obviously made your mind up anyway.
    That is your prerogative. I didn’t really think the list would make any difference to a closed mind.

  161. Maz said

    Boris # 155.
    Maz said: The Institute for Creation Research is Accredited by the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS), an agency which itself is recognized and approved by the U.S. Department of Education.

    Boris says: First of all this claim is NOT true. Second, the ICR is registered with the IRS as a tax exempt ‘non-scientific’ religious organization. The best arguments against creationism are made by the creationists themselves.

    Actually I didn’t say it, it came from the site where I got the list.

    I guess nothing I or anyone else says will make a bit of difference to some people.

  162. Maz said

    Boris: “If God cannot be taken literally when he writes [in the Bible] of the rising sun, then how can one insist that he can be taken literally when writing of the rising of the sun.”

    (Boris):This is the kind of nonsense that Christian homeschooling parents bludgeon their children with. People like Bob Griffin and Maz really do believe this nonsense but are too embarrassed to admit it in public, but only to each other.

    Another statement that has no foundation in reality. First of all I believe God and what He has had written in His Word, and rely on the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to understand it.
    It is a spiritual book that can only be understood by the Spirit and those who He indwells.
    I am in no way embarrassed about anything….why should I admit to something that is opposed to something I truly believe in? I am quite willing to admit when I am wrong, but in this case I do not believe I am wrong in what I believe…….anymore than you would admit you are wrong.

  163. Maz said

    Boris: #158. Bottom Line: The RATE group will produce discordant results because they have guaranteed discordance in their proposal. This does not represent research, it represents a planned confirmation of a faulty hypothesis and can not be called science in any sense of the word.

    This sounds very much like the tactics of the evolutionist.
    Where did you get this nice piece of information?

  164. Maz said

    If there is one thing that I have found since using a computer, it is this; that you can find almost anything on it For AND Against anything!
    I have come to the conclusion that someone along the line is lying. Ofcourse each side will accuse the other of doing so…..and in the end……we get nowhere……..unless……we actually KNOW the Truth.
    I have nothing to lose by believing what I believe….that God loves this world and sent His Son to save it. But there are those who will lose everything by what they believe……that God doesn’t exist and wer’e just a product of mindless chemical interactions.

  165. Boris said

    Bob says: Im glad youre looking at the Bible some. What any Bible character did is more plausible than the big bang – how does nothing from nothing give us something?

    Boris says: Quantum physics tells us that the mass-energy the universe is comprised of always existed, just in a different form than we see today. You Christians are the ones that claim that God created the laws of physics but had to break them in order to create the universe! All of your arguments collapse on themselves Bob.

    Bob says: You would hold the intruder at bay? Good luck.

    Boris says: I played football and boxed in school Bob and I lift weights on a regular basis. I’m not above defending myself if I deem it necessary. I wouldn’t harm anyone I didn’t absolutely have to though.

    Bob says: The Bible tells us all men are sinful. The world looks like thats correct.

    Boris says: Right, your evil religion unjustly criminalizes the entire human race, even innocent children.

    Bob says: Some Christians have certainly been very evil, but lets look at our lifetime. Your evolutionist/atheist buddies have killed about 100 million people in the last 100 years. So you answer: would you rather live under Christians or atheists?

    Boris says: I need the exact places, times and figures within a million or so of exactly who was killed where and by whom and for what reason. Since you cannot provide this I demand an apology for this blatant lie.

    Bob says: Science is self correcting? Then why are discredited evolutionist experiments still in textbooks today? You would be wrong.

    Boris says: Name just one of these “discredited” experiments Bob. Name one experiment or demonstration that creationists have EVER done. ROFL! They won’t because they can’t!

    Bob says: My insane position is 6000 years old. What is your exact science number for age of the earth? 3 billion to 15 billion years? Thats a fairly substantial difference for an exact science. You can have a 10 to 15 Billion year difference and all these guys are thought of as geniuses.

    Boris says: Well we both know no creationist has ever been called a genius. They’ve been called liars and it has been proved that they are indeed liars. How is it Bob, that we can see light coming from billions of light-years away if the universe is just 6000 years old?

    Bob says: The rocks were made when material was spewed from a volcano.

    Boris says: Right, a volcano that was millions of years old.

    Bob says: Glad to see at the end you are at least reading the Bible more than I thought. As Ive stated before, I admit neither of us can prove our position with certainty. I believe the Bible, which had over 60 prophecies come true in the person of Jesus.

    Boris says: Each of these prophecies is confirmed in no other place except the Bible. We have no independent evidence that events actually took place as described – especially the ones happening in heaven. Before making the extraordinary claim that something supernatural occurred, simple common sense tells us that we must rule out the ordinary, far more plausible account that the events are fictional, written so as to conform to biblical prophecies. – Victor Stenger

    Bob says: You believe in an unobservable fairy tale by your atheist friends.

    Boris says: Bob what are the stories in the Bible if they are not unobservable fairy tales? Geez. Another argument explodes in your face. You’re sooooo self-destructive Bobby.

    Bob says: Im still waiting on absolute proof of the age of the earth, any fossil, any transition etc. You cant do it. You have to assume. You can observe none of the wild claims from the past.

    Boris says: Are you kidding me? Like you can observe the much wilder claims like that a magic talking snake fooled a rib-woman into eating from a magical tree. Again, all your arguments can be turned around on your own insane superstitions. How DOES your foot taste Bob?

    Bob says: All you can do is observe current day micro evolution and say that proves macro.

    Boris says: Macro evolution is simply micro evolution over millions of years. Do you own a dictionary?

  166. Boris said

    Maz and Bob Griffin,
    There is no domain of human knowledge or endeavor that is more open to scrutiny than science. It is the very nature of science that it be honest, fair, and aboveboard, ready at all times to admit its errors and revise its theories, and when scientists are caught faking their laboratory results, in support of a doubtful hypothesis they know they have bought their careers a one-way ticket to oblivion. Without these checks on its practices, science would be doomed to failure; serious researchers would be few and beleaguered, and we would have no polio vaccine, no space flight, no television, no computers, not even plastic garbage bags.

    The scientific method involves the observation of phenomena or events in the real world, the statement of a problem, some reflection and deduction on the observed facts and their possible causes and effects, the formation of a hypothesis, (experimentation or prediction), and when tests repeatedly confirm the hypothesis – the erection of a theory.

    In contrast, the methods and claims of creationists are not subject to experimentation, prediction, revision, or falsification. To them, these pursuits are irrelevant, because they believe they possess the “truth” as set forth in the Bible. The creationists are determined to force their will on society and the schools, through the courts if possible. Their strategy, ironically enough, considering the moral precepts of Christianity is founded on deception, misrepresentation, and obsfucation designed to dupe the public into thinking there is a genuine scientific controversy about the validity of evolution. No such controversy exists, but it is difficult for the lay public to distinguish between the scientist, who often disagree on the nuances of evolutionary theory (but not on evolution’s existence), from the creationists, who stick together and cloak absurd claims in scientific terminology.

    I would challenge any creationist to tell us all why scientists, especially those at say NIH or NASA would want to promote science that does not and cannot work. Why are there evolutionary biologists on the payroll of every government in the world? What are they doing? Trying to prove the Bible is wrong to billions of people on the other side of the world to people who have never heard of the Bible or Jesus Christ? I can’t wait to read your responses to these questions.

  167. Maz said

    Boris: WHO is forcing WHO’S will on society?

    No scientific controversy exists?

    ”I can’t wait to read your responses to these questions.”

    Patience is a virtue.

  168. Boris said

    Maz, fundamentalist Christians are no longer able to force their will on society and that is what has you people so agitated. No one is forcing you or asking you to believe one word any scientist says. No scientists care what you or the rest of your particular cult believes. No science teacher tells a child they must believe that the earth orbits the sun or isn’t stationary, that evolution must be believed or the child will be punished eternally. That’s the game YOUR side plays with children’s heads.

    If there were any scientific controversy about evolution then the creationists would not be trying to sell their creationist fantasies as science to the general public. There is no controversy among biologists about the validity of evolution, no controversy among cosmologists that think the universe is a few thousand years old and those who don’t, no controversy among geologists about the approximate age of the earth, no controversy among human origins researchers about common descent, nor do any of the other trumped supposed controversies creationist hoaxers talk about actually exist.

    Every public school system in the world teaches evolution. It’s only in America that there are still religious fanatics trying to return a nation to the Dark Ages – when Christianity ruled the world and no science was done at all where it reigned. Fortunately the Muslims made great advances in science during this time or the world would still be suffering from Christianity’s war on science.

  169. Maz said

    Boris:
    I am in no way agitated.
    I am not in a cult.

    Boris says: No science teacher tells a child they must believe that the earth orbits the sun or isn’t stationary, that evolution must be believed or the child will be punished eternally. That’s the game YOUR side plays with children’s heads.

    The message of the gospel is that God loves them and wants them to know Him.
    Children are not told to believe in God or be punished eternally.

    Boris says: If there were any scientific controversy about evolution then the creationists would not be trying to sell their creationist fantasies as science to the general public.

    Isn’t that what the evolutionists are doing?

    Boris says: Every public school system in the world teaches evolution.

    So…….again……..WHO is forcing WHO’s ideas onto WHO?

    Boris says: It’s only in America that there are still religious fanatics trying to return a nation to the Dark Ages…

    Wrong. We are everywhere. And I am not in America! (Actually I am a Jesus fanatic).

    Boris says: Fortunately the Muslims made great advances in science during this time or the world would still be suffering from Christianity’s war on science.

    They also made great advances into other peoples countries in the past…..and what are they doing today?

  170. Boris said

    Maz says: The message of the gospel is that God loves them and wants them to know Him.
    Children are not told to believe in God or be punished eternally.

    Boris says: Are you kidding me? Then why do you tell them about hell?

    Maz says: So…….again……..WHO is forcing WHO’s ideas onto WHO? Wrong. We are everywhere. And I am not in America! (Actually I am a Jesus fanatic).

    Boris says: That’s right, and they’re forcing Geometry on children too. We teach children about biological evolution for the same reason that we teach them Geometry. We need mathematicians and we need biologists.
    Yeah, you’re not in America, you’re in Dizzyland somewhere. Wow! Do you even know where you are?

    Maz says: They also made great advances into other peoples countries in the past…..and what are they doing today?

    Boris says: We should indict Muslim scientists for the crimes of their power mad religious fanatic leaders – even those of the future? On what grounds? Human rights violations by a particular religion don’t discount scientific contributions by some of its followers. If they did we would have to discount all the discoveries made by Christian scientists too.

  171. Max said

    Boris: When I taught in Sunday school we didn’t teach children about hell fire, it was enough to tell them that Jesus loved them. You seem preoccupied with hell.

    Boris says: Yeah, you’re not in America, you’re in Dizzyland somewhere. Wow! Do you even know where you are?

    Your belligerance is surfacing again. To be honest I am finding this a pointless exercise, it is obvious that having an adult debate with you is nigh impossible the way you feel about God and Christianity.

  172. Maz said

    Somehow my name got changed to Max……….but the last post was mine.

  173. Boris said

    Maz says: Boris: When I taught in Sunday school we didn’t teach children about hell fire, it was enough to tell them that Jesus loved them. You seem preoccupied with hell.

    Boris says: No, you keep threatening me with it. If you did threaten a child with hell you should be arrested and treated as any other child abuser. 30 years in a high security federal prison for the first offense should be the law on that.

    Maz says: Boris says: Yeah, you’re not in America, you’re in Dizzyland somewhere. Wow! Do you even know where you are?

    Boris says: Your posts are insane. I’m not the only one on here who thinks that. I believe the majority is with me on this. What do you expect?

    Maz says: Your belligerance is surfacing again. To be honest I am finding this a pointless exercise, it is obvious that having an adult debate with you is nigh impossible the way you feel about God and Christianity.

    Boris says: It is certainly is pointless since you don’t understand that an atheist has no feelings about something that doesn’t exist. How do you feel about mirmaids? Don’t answer. Just pretend I don’t exist from now on.

  174. F. L. A. said

    Maz, there is a saying….”One man’s cult is another man’s religion.” What is the main difference between to two? TIME AND POPULARITY.

    Bob, post#159, why do you continue to ask for evidence that you already believe in your heart of hearts to be false? Is it, like…..some kind of a personal test so you can prove to yourselfe that you have what it takes to defend your faith? Or are you just attracted to conflict, like me? Just wondering.
    As for the people I’ve killed, you can only speculate[eternal grin].
    GOOD NIGHT.

  175. Maz said

    Boris: Your last line…………OK.

    F.L.A: It is imperative that we find the Truth….otherwise we have all eternity to regret it.
    Whatever people think about hell…..and I don’t like the idea of it either, who would, but if God has made a way to spend an eternity in absolute peace and joy by sending His Own Beloved Son to die in our place, why do some arrogantly shout abuse in His face today, just as they did when He hung on that Roman cross, and turn wilfully away from the free salvation He offers, and not only reject His love but vehemently attack and insult those who do believe in Him and follow Him.

    You shall know a man by his ‘fruit’.

  176. F. L. A. said

    And what of those of us who are not men?
    Nevermind.

    For someone who claims to seek “Truth” you don’t seem very open to new ideas, or by Truth, were you referrin to Truth in a theological sense?
    Many of us have other options to chose from which are just as satisfying as yours[I am guessing, of course. When I finally die I shall truely know for sure.Either way it should be VERY exciting!].

  177. Maz said

    F.L.A: Men…..Figure of speech.

    I shall not be open to that which is contrary to the scriptures. I am open as far as I test everything I hear by them. I live by Gods Word, because I know it’s true and I can trust it.

    When Pilate asked Jesus ”What is Truth?”…’it’….HE…. was standing right infront of him……Jesus is the Truth. He is the truth, the reality of God, for He was God in the flesh. There is also truth in the Bible, but it testifies of the truth of God and Jesus Christ.

    There are many people in the world who are satisfied with their beliefs, but they all differ one from the other. Are they all true? Obviously not. I believe truth is absolute. There is only one truth, and it is important that we find it and hold on to it in this life. It will lead us to our final destiny.

  178. Boris said

    Here’s something from my friend Brian:
    Let’s start with some basic facts: We are biological organisms. We are made out of flesh and bone, and we depend on the operation of certain cellular, chemical processes in order to continue functioning and experiencing the world around us. Once these functions stop, we die. When we die, there is no longer any electrical activity going on within the structure of our brains, and it is then no longer possible for us to experience anything. What had been our personalities, our memories, our hopes and fears all cease to exist. From this point on, the walls of our cells break down, and eventually our bodies decompose into their constitute elements through biological/chemical processes. This is a fate we share with every other living thing on the planet.

    Of course, there is no evidence whatsoever for an afterlife. Nor is there any reasonable, fact-based explanation for it. None. So here is where the apologetics come in. You claim that human beings possess “souls” that somehow represent consciousness and personality. You declare that these “souls” can exist separately from our bodies. You assert that these “souls” somehow leave our bodies at death and go somewhere else, employing some inexplicable means of locomotion. This is all nonsense, of course. This is wild speculation about things that you cannot know, and that you do not know. Have you ever tried to figure out what a “soul” actually is? I have asked numerous Christians to explain the term, and they can’t do it, because they don’t know what it is actually supposed to be. No one does. The simple fact of the matter is that there is no evidence for a mind/brain duality, or a “ghost in the machine.”
    As a Christian, you really have to ask yourself some questions. You have to ask yourself, “Am I being manipulated? Is it at all possible that the reason I argue so passionately about the ineffable and the unknowable, about things that I cannot possibly know, is that I am simply trying to convince myself that I will inherit eternal bliss-and that I will escape eternal torture in hell? Is it possible that all my orgiastic expressions of religious fervor derive from the primal will to survive, something far more ancient than any holy book? Is it possible that my religion’s founders cynically co-opted this primal will to survive and the universal fear of pain in order to gain converts-and thus increase their wealth and power? Is it also possible that these leaders were deluded?”

    I’ll repeat myself: You are not going to live forever. Just think about it. You have no memories of your existence prior to the development of your brain because you did not exist prior to the formation of your brain. And you will not exist after it is gone. Look at your body-that is you. You are not something else. You cannot escape what you are or overcome biology. You think otherwise, of course, but you cannot explain how life after death would be possible. The reason why you cannot explain it and the reason why you will never be able to explain it is simply because it is not possible. The afterlife is a fiction.
    Your life is undeniably real. It will not last forever, but that is why it is so very precious. Don’t waste it on a delusion.

  179. Bob Griffin said

    Boris:

    How did the laws of physics come about? A big bang will bring disorder, not order. Ever heeard of the cosmological constant?

    Im glad to hear you work out. Would you take a knife to a gunfight?

    I googled the age of the earth. The exact number seemed to come up at 4.54 to 4.55 billion years. Whats the difference between 4.4 and 4.5 billion?

    How do you know the volcano was millions of years old?

    You automatically discredit anything religious, but put your faith in atheists. Thats brave. You consistently believe that your position is 100% correct. Thats brave too. Step 1 of the scientific method is to Observe the phenomena. If you think anything about millions of years has been observed you are deluded.

    Im still not tasting my feet. Micro examples dont cut it. Your theory states that all of us came from 1 or more animals. So heres one for you: which animal did we all come from? You know we have 99% of our DNA just like mice. Did we come from a mouse?

    I cant believe you could find something that disagrees with the RATE study.

    You need a dictionary not written by atheists. Micro is change win a species, like several kinds of dogs. Macro is a change between, like dog to cat. Unless I have on atheist glasses I cant see what youre proposing.

  180. F. L. A. said

    I used to criticize the theological version of the universe that people like Maz and Brad existed in as being so cold, tiny, and empty.It was about the worst idea of the universe I had incountered.
    Until I meditated on the universe according to Borise’s friend Brian in post#178.
    It is an easy thing to disbelieve in the supernatural, in magick, in the power of DEITY, until one has been touched by such things.
    Boris, it is a very simple thing.We get those Gods that we deserve.
    If an Atheistic view and all that that implies is all that you want out of the universe, then that is all that you shall ever get.

    We get the love and belief that we give.

  181. Boris said

    Bob said: How did the laws of physics come about? A big bang will bring disorder, not order. Ever heeard of the cosmological constant?

    Boris says: There is no reason why the laws of physics cannot have come from within the universe itself. In order for any principle of nature we write down to be objective and universal, it must be formulated in such a way that it does not depend on the point of view of any particular observer. The principle must be true from all point of views, from every “frame of reference.” And so, for example, no objective law can depend on a special moment in time or a position. In 1918 mathematician Emmy Noether proved that the most important physical laws of all – conservation of energy, linear momentum, and angular momentum – will automatically appear in any model that does not single out a special moment in time, position in space, and direction in space. These properties of space-time are called symmetries. The mathematical formulations of these models (which are provided in The Comprehensible Cosmos) must reflect this requirement if they are to be objective and universal. Surprisingly, when this is done, most of the familiar laws of physics appear naturally. Those that are not immediately obvious can be seen to plausibly arise by a process known as spontaneous symmetry breaking. I do not have the burden of proving this scenario. The believer who wishes to argue that God is the source of physical law has the burden of proving 1) that my account is wrong, 2) that no other natural account is possible, and 3) that God did it.

    Bob said:Im glad to hear you work out. Would you take a knife to a gunfight?

    Boris says: You’ve got Jesus with you. Why do you need a weapon at all?

    Bob said:I googled the age of the earth. The exact number seemed to come up at 4.54 to 4.55 billion years. Whats the difference between 4.4 and 4.5 billion?

    Boris says: About 2 per cent. Pretty close I’d say, since your guess is off by about 4.4 to 4.5 billion years Bob.

    Bob said: How do you know the volcano was millions of years old?

    Boris says: Because geologists tell us that is how long they take to form. It takes a good while for that lava to burst through the crust of the Earth.

    Bob said: You automatically discredit anything religious, but put your faith in atheists. That’s brave. You put your faith in ancient parchments written on by primitives who cut the heads of animals and sprayed blood on an altar and burned goat flesh to appease their God who was well pleased by the smell of burning flesh and the sight of blood. That’s not brave, it’s nuts in my opinion. Do you know that less than 100 million people on the entire Earth agree with your dogma of a young Earth? YOU’RE in the minority and a tiny minority it is Bob. This minority happens to be entirely made up of literal Bible believers, people who have disagreed with and fought against every scientific discovery that has ever been made since there has been a Bible and you know it too. And you have the nerve to claim that your religious superstitions can be somehow supported by science. Quit trying to make it sound like I’m the one who is going against conventional science.

    Bob said: You consistently believe that your position is 100% correct.

    Boris says: No, I never said that. I know that your positions is 100% incorrect though and so does the rest of the world.

    Bob said: Thats brave too. Step 1 of the scientific method is to Observe the phenomena. If you think anything about millions of years has been observed you are deluded.

    Boris says: If you think we cannot look billions of years back in time through the Hubble telescope then it is YOU who are deluded my friend.

    Bob said: Im still not tasting my feet. Micro examples dont cut it. Your theory states that all of us came from 1 or more animals. So heres one for you: which animal did we all come from? You know we have 99% of our DNA just like mice. Did we come from a mouse?

    Boris says: No, life started as simple one celled ocean plant life with no DNA which reproduced by simply falling apart.

    Bob said: I cant believe you could find something that disagrees with the RATE study.

    Boris says: I can’t believe that you would call something a “study” that states its conclusion before it even starts “testing” anything. When you do research to prove a certain point that is NOT science it is pseudo-science. Scientists are NOT out to offer dogmatic proofs of anything. They are after knowledge they can build upon so they don’t do research to PROVE things. The RATE study is just another of many poorly thought out creationist hoaxes, like dressing creationism up in a lab coat and calling it “Intelligent Design.”

    Bob said: You need a dictionary not written by atheists. Micro is change win a species, like several kinds of dogs. Macro is a change between, like dog to cat. Unless I have on atheist glasses I cant see what youre proposing.

    Boris says: I’m not proposing anything Bob, but the word is won’t Bob, you won’t see, because you don’t want to. Macro evolution is simply micro evolution over millions of years. You don’t believe in science because you’d rather believe in magic. Science is scary isn’t it Bob?

  182. Boris said

    Bob Griffin,
    You told a vicious lie on this thread. I asked you to back it up and you ignored me. Here it is and my response:

    Bob says: Some Christians have certainly been very evil, but lets look at our lifetime. Your evolutionist/atheist buddies have killed about 100 million people in the last 100 years. So you answer: would you rather live under Christians or atheists?

    Boris says: I need the exact places, times and figures within a million or so of exactly who was killed where and by whom and for what reason. Since you cannot provide this I demand an apology for this blatant lie.

    Do not post another word on this thread until you explain exactly why you told this lie Bob Griffin. You are a liar and you KNOW it. This radio station has completely discredited itself by letting someone like you get on the public airways and spread your evil lies. Anything else they let you post further discredits EVERYTHING they stand for.

  183. Boris said

    Theism
    So, let us begin with the crimes of theists. They are extensive, so I have parsed them up according to eras of history.
    Pre-Modern:

    * The An Shi rebellion, lead by the son of a sorceress who shows every indication of subscribing to socially normal contemporary religion, cost 36 million lives.
    * The Greco-Persian war, lead by the theocratic Persians against the more subtly theocratic Greeks, cost a conservative 500,000 lives.
    * Pre-modern conquests by the theocratic, undeniably Muslim Arab empire can be conservatively estimated at 10 million.
    * Total pre-modern human sacrifices, the vast majority of which were perpetrated by the theocratic Aztec empire, can be estimated as high as 6 million, but I will put the count at 1 million for now.
    * The Mughal conquest of North India (which is categorically distinct from the expansion of the Arab Empire), which was explicitly religious in nature and which pitted a Muslim theocracy against a Hindu one, cost 100,000 lives, conservatively.

    Middle Ages:

    * Genghis Khan, an avowedly religious person (and, like many of his co-religionists, a homophobe of the highest Levitical quality), ground up about 40 million lives in the expansion of his empire throughout the 13th century.
    * The emperor of Japan, a routinely avowed theist who has been throughout history considered himself somewhat divine, on ordering an invasion of Korea in the 16th century, end up causing about a million casualties. Further competition among the shoguns around that period for the favor of the divine theocrat cannot be calculated due to lack of records, so I will conservatively estimate 500,000.
    * The Holy Roman Empire’s various ideological squabbles, mostly from the Peasants’ War, can be conservatively estimated to have caused about 100,000 deaths.
    * Total violence between Protestants and Catholics over disputes of religious ideology in the Middle Ages have been conservatively estimated at 14 million.
    * The Crusades, the old and boring example that gets trotted out routinely, have been estimated as causing around 9 million casualties total, between Muslims, Christians, and Jews.

    Early Modern:

    * The unabashed holocaust perpetrated against the aboriginal inhabitants of the North America is far and away the most lethal item on this list. Between the militant Catholic fundamentalists known as Conquistadors, and the deaths caused by militant Protestant fundamentalists known as Puritans using biological warfare in the form of smallpox-infected blankets against natives, the total desolation across the continent exceeded 100 million even before the American nation swept most of the rest from the continent by force.
    * The Spanish Inquisition is an oft-cited example, but its real death toll is insignificant. Perhaps 1,000 or less.
    * The witch trials of North America (Salem and Connecticut being the only two famous, but far from the only, examples) are also oft-cited examples, but they too are utterly insignificant as measures of the depravity of the average theist. 100 or less.

    Modern:

    * The early 20th century’s Armenian Genocide (and yes, it was a genocide), carried out by a vassal state of the theocratic Ottoman empire, cost 1.5 million lives.
    * Hitler, an avowed Catholic, Mussolini, who had the good sense to be non-religious in his youth but who later converted to Catholicism in 1927, and Hirohito, an avowed participant of the state religion of Japan, launched the Second World War in 1939 (or was that 1941?). The total deaths from this war have been calculated at about 72 million, including the Holocaust. The largely atheistic citizens of the Soviet Union were the biggest victims of this war of theistic expansionism. This does not include
    * the Nanking massacre, which modern historians estimate took about 500,000 lives, almost entirely Chinese.
    * The 1948 Arab-Israeli War has been reliably tallied at almost exactly 20,000 casualties.
    * The Six-Day War has been reliably tallied at almost exactly 22,000 casualties.
    * The First Sudanese Civil War (which is not the Darfur crisis), which was explicitly religious in nature, cost about 500,000 lives. The Second Sudanese Civil War (which is also not the Darfur crisis) cost about 2 million.
    * “Operation Searchlight,” the pogroms carried out by the megalomaniacal theists in charge of Bangladesh in the early 1970s, cost 3 million lives.
    * Conservative estimates of the Hindu extremist group known colloquially as the Tamil Tigers place the ongoing death toll at 215,000.
    * Other forms of modern Hindu violence against other religions or lapsed Hindus (almost entirely in the form of Hindu-on-Muslim violence) can be veeeery conservatively estimated at 25,000.
    * Late 20th century violence by the Islamic Ba’ath party of Iraq (a nation so religious that it had the phrase Allahu Akbar scrawled across its flag and which once hosted one of the largest mosques in the region built by Saddam Hussein) against ethnic Kurds cost about 150,000 lives.
    * The 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War, also known in Iran as the Holy War, cost about 750,000 lives, conservatively.
    * The 1994 Rwandan genocide, not religious in nature but certainly caused by theists, resulted in about 1 million deaths.
    * The Ustasa regime’s mass murders, which would have been impossible had not the regime been propped up by the Catholic Church (whose fingerprints can be found in nearly every example of 20th century fascism; see “God Is Not Great” by award-winning journalist Christopher Hitchens), tally up to “hundreds of thousands.” Lets call it 200,000.
    * The 2001 attack on the World Trade Center by Muslim fundamentalists who all came into extremist Islam in adult life after coming out of good educations and good backgrounds in countries that had never known any measure of oppression by the United States cost almost 3,000 lives.
    * The 2003 invasion of Iraq by the avowed theocrat George W. Bush who said that the war was waged on instructions from God, launched against the (above-mentioned) theocratic Ba’ath Party of Iraq, has, between insurgents, Americans, Iraqi security, Iraqi civilians, foreign military officers, and foreign civilians, cost about 1 million lives, mostly caused by Muslim fundamentalist extremists.

    Deaths from theism whose full tallies are impossible to calculate:

    * Routine violence, starvation, economic attrition against, denial of medical services to, and criminal negligence of India’s dalits over the millennia have probably cost hundreds of thousands or millions of lives.
    * Religion’s endless war on vaccines has caused and will cause the resurgence of old diseases and the ravaging of current populations, mainly in Africa, since it takes only a few unvaccinated people to allow a virus to mutate into a strain that resists vaccination. The death toll from this encouragement of disease-related deaths by religion will undoubtedly skyrocket in the coming century.
    * The Vatican’s and Muslim leaders’ routine opposition to safe-sex practices, especially through the murderous criminals known as “missionaries” in Africa, has exasperated the HIV problem considerably and there is no way to know how many hundreds of thousands of people have died slow, agonizing deaths at the hands of HIV as a result, and how many will continue to suffer in the future.
    * The death toll from those who refuse to seek medical attention because of religious beliefs, Jehovah’s Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions, Christian scientists who refuse all treatment, those who subscribe to the undeniably religious pseudoscientific New Age beliefs that prefer bullshit to real medical therapies, etc., is impossible to calculate. I do not doubt that it is thousands every year.
    * Honor killings in Muslim societies. Probably hundreds every year.
    * The deaths that will be caused by the inevitable famine in the fundamentalist Confucian state of North Korea will be staggering but difficult to precisely calculate.

    Disputed theist deaths:

    * A 3rd-century compendium of ancient Semitic fairy tales and military procedures known as the Bible records a number of deaths, mainly at the hands of a genocidal maniac worshiped as a patriarch named Moses. I doubt most of these, so I will not include their tens of thousands in the final tally.

    Negligible sources of theism-related deaths:

    * Botched circumcision, Waco, various Mormon atrocities in the 19th century, UFO cult suicides, and genuinely bizarro psychos like Andrea Yeats, or other oddities like this have not been included. Theism doesn’t need the help.

    Final tally for theism: 2,229,074,100

    And now for Atheism:

    * The French Revolution, built on Enlightenment principles, probably cost somewhere from 1-2 million lives.
    * Maoism in China, indisputably atheist, was indirectly responsible for the starvation of 20 million Chinese citizens during the “Great Leap Forward” and the “Cultural Revolution” combined.
    * Even though I could find no evidence that Pol Pot was an atheist, his regime was anti-most religion, so I will include the tally of his regime, whose very tip-top highest estimates place the death toll at 3 million.

    Disputed atheist:

    Stalin: recently-unearthed secret documents indicate that Stalin may have been made a deist who “made his peace with God” and who brought priests back into favor and who encouraged religious icons to be paraded around Leningrad for good luck during the siege. He had “complex” relations with religious institutions in the Soviet Union, notes Hector Avalos, and so there is every indication that Stalin might have been a closet atheist turned closet deist, or even Orthodox Christian, who kept his faith very private. You’re welcome I didn’t include the 50 million victims of his pogroms under the theism casualties, because the new, very modern evidence against Stalin’s post-1940 atheism is pretty damn good.

    Highest possible atheism death toll without Stalin: 25,000,000.
    Highest possible atheism death toll with Stalin: 75,000,000.

    So, at its very highest, atheists have caused almost a whopping 75 million deaths throughout world history. This is about 1/20th the casualties caused by the morally depraved theists who have dominated history. Given that statistically about 16% of the world is non-religious but only about 5% of total world military/genocidal violence has been caused by atheism, we can safely add one more piece of evidence that theists have proven themselves to be far and away more morally depraved, violent, aggressive, brutally selfish, and downright nasty to each other than us infidels.

    And to think that the theists say that we atheists can’t know right from wrong.

  184. ADB said

    Impressive, you’ve just proved what lot’s of folks these days don’t believe- that people are inherently sinful! 🙂

  185. Boris said

    ADB this is for you.
    The Christian sin scam exposed:

    The Law obviously gave rabbi St Paul – or rather those who wrote pseudo graphically in his name – a problem. If the Law was a perfect code of behavior why was the salvation of Christ necessary?

    “If righteousness come by law, Christ is dead in vain.”
    – Galatians. 2:21

    If the Almighty had ‘given up’ on the misbehaving Jews why not just take the Law to the gentiles? Paul’s objective, however, was to fuse the dying/rising sun-god of the pagans with Jewish scripture. In a stunning short-circuiting of the theology Paul gave the answer: we are all sinners.

    “For God has consigned all people to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all”
    – Romans 11.32.

    “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.”
    – Romans 3.23.

    The entire human race is already condemned!

    God makes us all sin so that he can save us! Paul’s epistles refer to sin almost a hundred times. According to the radical rabbi, the atonement for all of humanity’s sins – past, present, future – had already been paid by the sacrificial death of the god-man Jesus. Aren’t we all “saved” then? Only with the intercession of a priest, says Paul, who can bring the sinner to the “grace of god”. All the sinner had to do was “accept Jesus”. Paul offers “fast-track” salvation for the pagan multitude … Says Paul:

    “For the wages sin pays is death, but the gift God gives is everlasting life by Jesus Christ our Lord.”
    – Romans 6.23.

    Thus Paul’s religion – in common with all others – creates the ‘problem’ for which it then offers the solution – submission to the priesthood, of course! Much of Paul’s message is actually to do with collecting cash …

    “So I thought it necessary to urge the brothers to visit you in advance and finish the arrangements for the generous gift you had promised … Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”
    – 2 Corinthians 9.5,7.

  186. ADB said

    Boris,
    Nice try, but when you actually have studied that horrible fictitious letter to the Romans you might actually understand what Paul meant in his discussion of the Law. I might recommend some excellent commentaries, but then their by Christians and therefore are imbecilic by your exalted standards.

    Best Wishes

  187. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Im sore and tired from riding my motorcycle, so Ill have to be quick. I didnt lie. I said atheists/evolutionists killed about 100 million people in our lifetime. Thats true. Mao, Hitler, Lenin, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Jong Il. I will have to check your list out, but I specifically said IN OUR LIFETIME AND THE LAST 100 YEARS (I KNOW YOU HATE CAPS). So in your lifetime, would you rather live under a country run by commie/atheist/evolutionists or Christians?

    I love how you know how the first life arrived. Even your buddy Darwin didnt know. Did you see it? When you get DNA, you have 3 billion base pairs in the right order at the right time. How about an explanation of how that is done by natural selection.

    You say science is exact. 2% off is not exact. You cant have your cake and eat it too.

    NO APOLOGIES FROM ME. I DID NOT LIE.

  188. Boris said

    The trail-blazing Christian missionary and apostle, St Paul, appears nowhere in the secular histories of his age (not in Tacitus, not in Pliny, not in Josephus, etc.) Though Paul, we are told, mingled in the company of provincial governors and had audiences before kings and emperors, no scribe thought it worthwhile to record these events. The popular image of the saint is selectively crafted from two sources: the Book of Acts and the Epistles which bear his name. Yet the two sources actually present two radically different individuals and two wildly divergent stories. Biblical scholars are only too familiar with the conundrum that chunks of Paul’s own story, gleaned from the epistles, are incompatible with the tale recorded in Acts but live with the “divine mystery” of it all. Perish the thought that they might recognize the whole saga is a work of pious fiction.

  189. Tripp said

    Boris – Were you around when “King Thomas” was posting his nonsense about Paul? You would have gotten along well with him.

  190. F. L. A. said

    Mmmmmmm, I think that Fred#2 would have been a better match up Tripp.

  191. Boris said

    Bob G said: I said atheists/ evolutionists killed about 100 million people in our lifetime. Thats true. Mao, Hitler, Lenin, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Jong Il.

    Boris says: First of all you just told another bunch of lies. Adolph Hitler was a devout Christian and the Holocaust was a totally Christian deed fueled only and completely by Christian fundamentalism and its inbred anti-Semitism. Lenin overthrew a monarchy. There is no evidence Pol Pot was an atheist. Stalinist Russia rejected Darwinian evolution and instead wrecked their biological sciences with Lysenkoism. So none of these people were “evolutionists.” That’s more lies you just told than I care to count Bob. You’re a VERY dishonest person. You just proved that beyond any doubt.

    Bob G said: I will have to check your list out, but I specifically said IN OUR LIFETIME AND THE LAST 100 YEARS (I KNOW YOU HATE CAPS). So in your lifetime, would you rather live under a country run by commie/atheist/evolutionists or Christians?

    Boris says: Atheists reject communism because it’s an ideology where the state has simply replaced the Christian God as the all-knowing, all-powerful authority. I don’t know any atheists who are communists. I’ll ask you: Do you want to live in a country run by Crusading, witch burning, snake handling anti-Semitic Christians or peace loving scientific humanists?

    Bob G said: I love how you know how the first life arrived. Even your buddy Darwin didnt know.

    Boris says: Scientists know a lot more than Darwin ever did. Science has moved way past that point Bob. Darwin wasn’t the only person to discover evolution, he was simply the first to write about it.

    Bob G said: Did you see it? When you get DNA, you have 3 billion base pairs in the right order at the right time. How about an explanation of how that is done by natural selection.

    Boris says: How about an explanation of why God needs to use all this complexity when he supposedly just speaks and things are as he wishes. First, using typical creationist backward reasoning, you are looking at modern life and HUMAN DNA no less, and marveling at its complexity. The first DNA was NOT this complex and the complexity of modern DNA arose from 4 billion years of natural selection. Name another plausible explanation. Just saying God did something explains nothing and is a desperate creationist attempt to tell scientists it isn’t worth trying to understand anything so they shouldn’t even bother. Tell us HOW God gets those 3 billion pairs in order Bob. Until you do that you’ve said nothing.

    Bob G said: You say science is exact. 2% off is not exact. You cant have your cake and eat it too.

    Boris says: I never said that. Science is not always exact and no scientist would make that claim. Rather it is done by trial and error and scientists absolutely love knocking down old theories and proving other scientists wrong. Some parts of science such as mathematics do require precision with no margin for error like landing a space ship on a planet or moon hundreds of millions of miles away. You claim to know more about the workings of the universe than the people who know how to do these things. The combination of arrogance an ignorance it takes to make the outrageous claims you make is off the charts. Bob, science knows a lot more than you think it does too. For example, it knows creationism is a hoax and has proved this.

    Bob G said: NO APOLOGIES FROM ME. I DID NOT LIE.

    Boris says: I caught you in a few lies on this very post Bob. Hitler, who spent three years in a seminary studying his hero famous anti-Semite Martin Luther, was as much of a Christian as you are. Like you, your Christian brother Adolph wouldn’t admit he lied either.`

  192. Boris said

    Tripp,
    I just got on this thread recently so I don’t know what King Thomas or anyone else wrote before that. I haven’t looked through the archives. Where is this guys stuff archived, if you remember? Also, someone said I was on other sites, someone said I was someone else or something like that and neither of those things are accurate. I’m not on any other sites so THAT Boris is not me and I am only Boris, not anyone else. Beware of impostors. And pastors. But not pasta. Praise the Pasta!

  193. F. L. A. said

    Boris, was not Adolf Hitler insane? And he had the power of charisma as most sucessful cult leaders do/had.
    The point that I am trying to make here is that within the twisted mind of Hitler, he may not have thought of himself as a lier at all. Does this make him a “good Christian”? Or an evil pleaser and manipulator of crowds that found ways to use theology, politics, and bigotry to satisfy his desires?
    I would compare him to the late Rev. Jim Jones in the sense that he may have thought of himself as doing the work of the Lord, yet after death and upon entering Christian Heaven for judgement, discovers that he is not as well recieved as he thought he would be, and being cast into Hell as he deserved.
    I may be wrong of course, but it amuses me to fantisize about such scenerios.

  194. F. L. A. said

    Under “Christianity”, the site “Was Paul[who was Saul] a deceiver of the church and the Aspostels?” and the added link to the other related site, in December,2007.

  195. Boris said

    FLA said: Boris, was not Adolf Hitler insane?

    Boris says: Hitler was a power-mad dictator. I believe most creationists are insane too though.

    FLA said: And he had the power of charisma as most sucessful cult leaders do/had.
    The point that I am trying to make here is that within the twisted mind of Hitler, he may not have thought of himself as a lier at all.

    Boris says: No of course he didn’t and Hitler didn’t think he was doing anything wrong killing 6 million Jews and 5 million other non-Christians either. These kinds of people don’t decide to become evil they think they are doing what is right. Perhaps Bob Griffin doesn’t know he isn’t telling the truth because he hasn’t researched what he’s repeated. But stating things as fact when you don’t know they are is lying.

    FLA said: Does this make him a “good Christian”?

    Boris says: No it makes Hitler a very very bad Christian. The worst ever I would say. But he didn’t do it alone; he had millions of good and not so good badly mislead Christian accomplices. I think Bob Griffin is a poor excuse for a good Christian also though it might be a bit unfair to compare him to Hitler, but then again in many ways not.

    FLA said: Or an evil pleaser and manipulator of crowds that found ways to use theology, politics, and bigotry to satisfy his desires?

    Boris says: Oh yes, Hitler used Christianity as a tool. He indoctrinated his army and concentration camp guards with evangelical Christianity and its anti-Semitism.

    FLA said: I would compare him to the late Rev. Jim Jones in the sense that he may have thought of himself as doing the work of the Lord, yet after death and upon entering Christian Heaven for judgement, discovers that he is not as well recieved as he thought he would be, and being cast into Hell as he deserved.

    Boris says: You mean like Jerry Falwell?

    FLA said: I may be wrong of course, but it amuses me to fantisize about such scenerios.

    Boris says: Yep, you’re a wacky guy. (In a good way).

  196. Tripp said

    Thanks, F.L.A. I found them too. Here are the links where he rants on and on about the relevance of Paul and debates that Paul was actually a false Christian who deceived and whose teaching continue to deceive. I never really agreed with him, but his comments were very intriguing…much like yours, Boris.

    https://truthtalklive.wordpress.com/2007/12/12/should-pastors-live-in-poverty/

    https://truthtalklive.wordpress.com/2007/12/12/should-pastors-live-in-poverty/

  197. Barney said

    You’re trippin’ if you think Boris’ and His Highness’ comments are alike.

  198. Boris said

    St. Paul has always been something of an enigma in New Testament studies, not least because of his “advanced” theology from such an apparently early date. Though contemporaneous, supposedly, with the godman Paul never meets him, and yet he becomes the most important apostle of the new religion. Then again, the man and his seminal epistles, by convention placed in the mid-years of the 1st century, are actually unheard of until late in the 2nd century. Could our hero from Tarsus be a pious fabrication – just like Jesus and the rest of the gang?

    On Paul’s ‘Epistles’

    “These letters have no allusion to the parents of Jesus, let alone to the virgin birth.

    They never refer to a place of birth (for example, by calling him ‘of Nazareth’).

    They give no indication of the time or place of his earthly existence.

    They do not refer to his trial before a Roman official, nor to Jerusalem as the place of execution.

    They mention neither John the Baptist, nor Judas, nor Peter’s denial of his master …

    These letters also fail to mention any miracles Jesus is supposed to have worked, a particularly striking omission, since, according to the gospels, he worked so many …

    Another striking feature of Paul’s letters is that one could never gather from them that Jesus had been an ethical teacher … on only one occasion does he appeal to the authority of Jesus to support an ethical teaching which the gospels also represent Jesus as having delivered. ”

    – G. A. Wells

    Journeys with an Apostle

    Witness to murder. Christian saint gets off to a cracking start.

    A Jew called Saul? An apostle called Paul? Or just plain invention?

    The popular image of St Paul is selectively crafted from two sources: the Book of Acts and the Epistles which bear his name. Yet the two sources actually present two radically different individuals and two wildly divergent stories. Each relies on the other for coherence yet simultaneously requires an arbitrary selection of “fact” from the wealth of patent nonsense. Can the historicity of the apostle realistically be maintained?

    Paul was here?

    Mission Impossible
    Viewed without the rose-tinted spectacles of Christian faith, the first voyage of Paul is as fanciful as the first voyage of Sinbad. Improbable, unlikely incidents are juxtaposed with the miraculous and the ridiculous. Faith can offer special pleas for every incongruity but logical thinking cannot.

    Visit Athens, burn a few books .. the Lord’s work.

    Magical Mystery Tours
    A Greek Odyssey?

    Acts records the apostle’s presence at major cities like Athens, Thessalonika and Ephesus and minor towns like Derbe and Mitylene, yet Paul’s epistles confirm very little of this grand tour. Whilst a missionary journey, in the manner of a wandering sage or peripatetic philosopher, is intrinsically plausible, the Pauline journeys, characterized by incongruities, contradiction, and the absurd, are not.

    Philippi

    Landfall at Philippi? For Brutus, anyway.

    Philippi – First Church in Europe or an origins myth?
    St Paul’s supposed journeys have more symbolism than realism. Taking a closer look at the military colony where the apostle is said to have converted a seller of purple and his gaoler and founded the first church in Europe. “See you at Philippi.”

    Lost at sea?

    Magical Mystery Tours
    The Road to Rome?

    The Church “tradition” of Paul’s voyage to Rome, followed by a martyr’s death, cannot survive rational scrutiny. The fable may well owe its origin to the works of Josephus, the cornucopia of the Christian fraudsters.

    Dear diary …

    Epistles – Part 1

    Many scholars attempt “chronologies” of the life of Paul, yet Acts of the Apostles is a naive fantasy and the Pauline letters of themselves provide few clues in time or place.

    “As I was saying … ”

    Epistles – Part 2

    “Pseudepigraphy” is the very heart of the New Testament. The Pauline corpus is not an exception – it is a compendium of fraud.

  199. John said

    Boris, are you familiar with the character called Fred whom F. L. A. was comparing you to?
    If not, then check out…
    “Christian and superstitious?” listed under “Christianity”, May20th,2008
    “Was Darwin right or wrong?” listed under “Evolution”, May19th,2008
    “Should a Christian ever vote for a pro-abortion candidate? And should a Christian ever act in a Soap Opera?” listed under “Politics”, May23rd,2008
    “Into all the world ……except?” listed under “Evangelism”, May28th,2008.

    You both seemed to have a lot in common.
    He did not last long and was banned within a month’s time.

  200. Boris said

    John,
    I went through and looked up some of those threads. Interestingly I did recognize a few things this guy posted. He’s a cut and paster because I have that “Evidence that Demands a Guilty Verdict” in my archives as well as some of the other stuff he posted. I did read a few things he said like where he said he knew he would be kicked off the thread soon because no dissenting opinions are allowed.

    Besides being an atheist what do I have in common with this guy. Am I that petty and annoying do you think? I think these people who claim to be atheists and then taunt people are Christians posing as atheists attempting to smear atheism. You can tell when they cut and paste a lot and I’ve seen this type of thing go on in Christian chat sites too.

    As far as being banned, I’ve already been warned by the moderator (not Stu) as to what ground rules are here. Do you happen to know what this guy did exactly to get banned? I just read where this Alex kid got banned by the moderator (not Stu). Apparently he smoked something he shouldn’t have and then got carried away with himself.

  201. We were trying to exercise as much patience as possible with Alex. We ran out.

    Moderator (i think i’ve explained the “not stu” part enough)

  202. Boris said

    Moderator,
    I’m not trying to get on anyone’s nerves which is I think what Alex was doing. I know atheists can sound abrasive to the devout and I’ve pointed out on this thread that that is mainly a matter of perception. Most atheists find much of the common things most Christians say quite abrasive too.

    I got on this thread because I listen to Chuck Crismier often. I like to read comments Christians make to each other mainly and observe how they often disagree with each other. Also, I studied ancient Greek a long time ago and one loses their ability to speak and think in a language if they don’t keep up with it. So I’m always looking for Christians who are trying to learn New Testament Greek who might want to Email back and forth in the Greek language just for practice. Anyone up for that?

  203. Boris said

    I would like to point out that I have demonstrated how to doubt Bob Griffin discussing evolution using his own superstitions.

    This man asked for an example of a transitional fossil and I gave him a long list of them. Frustrated by that Bob then asked for examples of living transitional species thinking that there couldn’t really be any of those left. I sent him a list of living transitional species. Bob claimed the universe could not have come from nothing all by itself and I showed how the mass-energy for the universe always existed. Bob wanted to know where the laws of physics came from and I showed him that too.

    All of Bob’s arguments (he has no evidence just arguments) have been clearly and easily refuted. Yet the next time we hear him on the air or he gets in a discussion with a skeptic Bob will make these same tired and debunked arguments all over again, knowing they’ve been completely refuted but hoping the people listening to him won’t know how to refute him. This is why we keep hearing the same ludicrous 100+ year old arguments from creationists. They never learn.

  204. Bob Griffin said

    Boris 191

    Youre killing me. Hitler was a Christian? I guess you saw that 1 line about him doing the Lords work and ran with it. His actions toward Christians were???? Not very kind. You dont think most of them were atheist? Amazing.

    You dont know any atheists that are commies, but there are a bunch of them. Ill stick w Christians vs atheists. I cant go for the atheist morality.

    I think GOD got 3 billion base pairs in order. You think a MINDLESS PROCESS got them in order. Ill stick w my view. What was the complexity of the first DNA? That would be good to know.

    Why would God not make something complex? All we see in our world gets more complex as we advance – like computers.

    For my 2% I was trying to show you that you cannot prove your point exactly. Neither side can, but that concept seems to tax your supposedly superior brain.

    Hitler did spend 3 years in a seminary? Big deal. That does not make him a Christian. Darwin started out being religious, so I assume you think he was a Christian?

  205. Bob Griffin said

    198 Boris

    The Bible can be proven true more than any ancient book ever written.

  206. Bob Griffin said

    203 Boris,

    I sure wish I was as smart as you. You gave me a long list of transitional fossils. I can give you a list of books refuting them, but like a good evolutionist who automatically dismisses the idea of supernatural creation, you would just say ” Those are bunk because they are written by creationist.” You gave me a list of what you classify as transtional species. Most people see them as a normal form, not as transitioning from one to another. You talked about how the universe always existed. Then why did we have a Big Bang? Why is our expanding universe consistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics and Einsteins theory of relativity? Before the Big Bang there were no laws of physics. They were created by the Big Bang itself.

    I do have a lot of evidence, but it comes from CREATIONISTS. Will you accept any of that? No, you never learn.

  207. F. L. A. said

    “Why would not God make something complex? All we see in our world gets more complex as we advance-like computers.”-Bob

    Wow, you were thiiiiiiiis close [about the width of a toothpick’s diameter] to making an evolutionary viewpoint, HEE! HEE!

    Post#205,…now lets not get carried away, Bob. It may seem as if this is so, but this may simply be because more learned people have put so much more time and energy into researching Christianity than other non-Christian works. Who knows what precious works of literature of equal or greater value were burned or otherwise lost or destroyed throughout time? And I cannot provide you with an exact number, but believe me, there have been a lot.
    How is your expanding universe consistent with the Second Law of Thermodynamics???

    Boris, Fred#2 was eventually banned because in addition to being too rude/aggressive in his argumentation, he used foul language within his last post. I believe it was a word that rhymes with “suck”. He reminded me of you because you are/were both Jews, but also Atheist, you both presented lots of intelligent, good sounding information, you both had a lot to say about Adolf Hitler as a Christian, and you both seem to detest Christianity above all other theological belief systems.
    I admit that I did entertain the notion that you were possibly Fred#2 come back for round two[no offense intended].
    On another note, I wouldn’t compare Hitler to Jerry Falwell just because Jerry Falwell doesn’t have the history of violence, death, and destruction that Hitler had. Osama Bin Laden would be a better pick, I think[although Osama Bin Laden probably had more “hands on experience than Adolf].

  208. bookert said

    Back to Bob Griffin 159 –

    ” I believe the Bible, which had over 60 prophecies come true in the person of Jesus.”

    Bob, that’s not prophecy. That’s literary foreshadowing. Set-up and payoff is textbook fiction. You’re heavy into guns, Bob, so you’re probably familiar with this writerly advice by Anton Chekhov – “One must not put a loaded rifle on the stage if no one is thinking of firing it.” Long stretches of the Bible are sloppily written – probably why most Chrisitans haven’t read it – but it’s at least accurate in this detail. The messiah is coming, the messiah is coming, the messiah is coming, the messiah is HERE!

    I wish I could take credit for this, but I read it online somewhere — “If you want to know about Batman, you don’t ask Robin, the boy wonder.”

    For Boris – What would you do if Kirk Cameron broke into your house?

    For the Moderator – So Alex is gone and Boris is one strike down? When the gadflies are gone this site will be a real yawner.

  209. Boris said

    Bob Griffin said: Youre killing me. Hitler was a Christian? I guess you saw that 1 line about him doing the Lords work and ran with it. His actions toward Christians were???? Not very kind.

    Boris says: 1 line Bob? How many would you like? I don’t want to clog the blog with facts that people can find in the library Bob. Here’s a few for starters:

    “National Socialism is not a cult-movement– a movement for worship; it is exclusively a ‘volkic’ political doctrine based upon racial principles. In its purpose there is no mystic cult, only the care and leadership of a people defined by a common blood-relationship… We will not allow mystically- minded occult folk with a passion for exploring the secrets of the world beyond to steal into our Movement. Such folk are not National Socialists, but something else– in any case something which has nothing to do with us. At the head of our programme there stand no secret surmisings but clear-cut perception and straightforward profession of belief. But since we set as the central point of this perception and of this profession of belief the maintenance and hence the security for the future of a being formed by God, we thus serve the maintenance of a divine work and fulfill a divine will– not in the secret twilight of a new house of worship, but openly before the face of the Lord… Our worship is exclusively the cultivation of the natural, and for that reason, because natural, therefore God-willed. Our humility is the unconditional submission before the divine laws of existence so far as they are known to us men.” -Adolf Hitler, in Nuremberg on 6 Sept.1938. [Christians have always accused Hitler of believing in pagan cult mythology. What is written here clearly expresses his stand against cults.]

    “We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.” -Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933 [This statement clearly refutes modern Christians who claim Hitler as favoring atheism. Hitler wanted to form a society in which ALL people worshipped Jesus and considered any questioning of such to be heresy. The Holocaust was like a modern inquisition, killing all who did not accept Jesus. Though more Jews were killed then any other it should be noted that MANY ARYAN pagans and atheists were murdered for their non-belief in Christ.]

    Here Hitler uses the Bible and his Christianity in order to attack the Jews and uphold his anti-Semitism:

    “My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow my self to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice… And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows . For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.” –Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

    “Christianity could not content itself with building up its own altar; it was absolutely forced to undertake the destruction of the heathen altars. Only from this fanatical intolerance could its apodictic faith take form; this intolerance is, in fact, its absolute presupposition.” -Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (It is quite obvious here that Hitler is referring to destructing the Judaism alters on which Christianity was founded.)

    “The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.” -Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (The idea of the devil and the Jew came out of medieval anti-Jewish beliefs based on interpretations from the Bible. Martin Luther, and teachers after him, continued this “tradition” up until the 20th century.)

    “With satanic joy in his face, the black-haired Jewish youth lurks in wait for the unsuspecting girl whom he defiles with his blood, thus stealing her from her people.” -Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (It is common in war for one race to rape another so that they can “defile” the race and assimilate their own. Hitler speaks about this very tactic here.)

    “The best characterization is provided by the product of this religious education, the Jew himself. His life is only of this world, and his spirit is inwardly as alien to true Christianity as his nature two thousand years previous was to the great founder of the new doctrine. Of course, the latter made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish people, and when necessary he even took the whip to drive from the temple of the Lord this adversary of all humanity, who then as always saw in religion nothing but an instrument for his business existence. In return, Christ was nailed to the cross, while our present- day party Christians debase themselves to begging for Jewish votes at elections and later try to arrange political swindles with atheistic Jewish parties– and this against their own nation.”–Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

    “…the fall of man in paradise has always been followed by his expulsion.” -Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (See Genesis Chapter 3 where humankind is cast from Eden for their sins. Hitler compares this to the need to exterminate the Jews for their sin against Christ.)

    “Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” –Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

    “The anti-Semitism of the new movement [Christian Social movement] was based on religious ideas instead of racial knowledge.” –Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (This quote is very interesting for it disperses the idea that Hitler raged war due to being an Aryan supremacist. He states quite clearly that he has a problem with Jews for their belief not race. That is why many German Jews died in WW2 regardless of their Aryan nationality.)

    “Only in the steady and constant application of force lies the very first prerequisite for success. This persistence, however, can always and only arise from a definite spiritual conviction. Any violence which does not spring from a firm, spiritual base, will be wavering and uncertain.” –Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (Here Hitler is admitting that his war against the Jews were so successful because of his strong Christian Spirituality.)

  210. John said

    Never fear Bookert, for there shall always be at least a few gadflies about.
    And other things.

  211. Boris said

    Bob said: You dont know any atheists that are commies, but there are a bunch of them. Ill stick w Christians vs atheists. I cant go for the atheist morality.

    Boris says: All good communists are atheists but few good atheists are communists Bob. I resent the comment about atheist morality because it is no different than you saying that your morality is superior to that of a person of different race than you.

    Bob said: I think GOD got 3 billion base pairs in order. You think a MINDLESS PROCESS got them in order. Ill stick w my view. What was the complexity of the first DNA? That would be good to know.

    Boris says: Self organization is not a mindless process as, for one example of many, the Fibonacci sequence of numbers shows. The complexity of DNA went from very simple to very complex, and with it life itself of course, as you admit in your next statement.

    Bob said: Why would God not make something complex? All we see in our world gets more complex as we advance – like computers.

    Boris says: How exactly is God making computers more complex?

    Bob said: For my 2% I was trying to show you that you cannot prove your point exactly. Neither side can, but that concept seems to tax your supposedly superior brain.

    Boris says: Scientists are not in the business of offering dogmatic proofs for anything. They do disprove things all the time though. And science very definitely HAS disproved creationism, without even trying, although creationism debunks itself.

    Bob said: Hitler did spend 3 years in a seminary? Big deal. That does not make him a Christian. Darwin started out being religious, so I assume you think he was a Christian?

    Boris says: In a few more decades even fundamentalists will have done a complete turn around on Charles Darwin. We all know how Christians denounced and tried to refute the findings of Copernicus, Galileo, Hubble, Newton, Einstein, Edison, even Ben Franklin and many other scientists. Now though, the Christians all try to claim these great scientists as their own don’t they? In the not too distant future Darwin will be recast as a Christian preacher who discovered God’s gift to the world of science, the great CHRISTIAN Theory of Evolution. Even the simultaneous discoverer of evolution by natural selection Alfred R. Wallace will be claimed by the Christians. Atheists will get on blogs like this one in the future to try to remind everyone that the Christians denied evolution for almost two centuries by posting quotes to prove the truth of the matter.

    “Man’s special creation is entirely unsupported by the facts, as well as in the highest degree improbable.” – Alfred R. Wallace

    Still, the day is near when Christians will once again have moved the goal posts back and act like they never had any problem with evolution. Darwin made the fundamentalist Christians finally let go of their flat earth claims in the 19th century. As soon as there’s science discovered that gives the fundies more to worry about than evolution, they’ll focus on denying that and will embrace Darwin. I’m no prophet but just you wait and see people

  212. Boris said

    Bookert,
    Nice take on the New Testament. It’s obvious the New Testament writers had parts of the Hebrew scriptures in front of them and that they wrote their stories to conform to them. The OT clearly says these prophecies were already fulfilled in the OT, which any Hebrew or liberal Christian scholar will point out. The fundies can’t figure this out though can they? Ah, the rose colored glasses of religion huh?

    The Batman and Robin saying is well known among atheists. When a Christian claims the proof that the Old Testament should be taken literally comes from the fact Jesus did, the Christian is proving the existence of Batman by citing the eyewitness testimony of Robin the Boy Wonder. I’m going to say ex-Christian turned atheist writer David Mills came up with this saying but I could be wrong.

    I’m not sure if I would be tempted to shoot Kirk Cameron or not. Just kidding. I don’t think people should be allowed on the public airways whose only purpose is to frighten people with the myth of hell into accepting the Christian brand of religious superstitions. A child might hear that and believe it.

  213. Bob Griffin said

    207 F.L.A.

    That sounds just like evolutionary theory. We had all these books burned or destroyed, and we cant see them. But I know they were there.

  214. Bob Griffin said

    208 Bookert

    That is prophecy. When you predict something hundreds and thousands of years before it happens, that would be prophecy.

  215. Bob Griffin said

    209 Boris

    Got a simple response for this that happened in your lifetime:

    I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

  216. Bob Griffin said

    211 Boris

    Please explain atheist morality for me.

    A former atheist smarter than you and I looked at DNA and decided he wouldnt be an atheist any longer. That would be Antony Flew.

    I dont think Christians will be claiming evolution as their idea any time soon.

  217. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Heres one for you. Alfred R Wallace says evolution cant explain human rationality or morality.

  218. Boris said

    Bob Griffin,
    Atheism isn’t a religion Bob, so it has no inherent preaching about morality. You creationists fall for your own false characterizing of atheism and evolution as religions and the demand that they make the same absolutist claims religions like Christianity make and then scold them for not doing so.

    Most atheists are secular humanists or scientific humanists and these things are philosophies. Humanists get their morals and ethics from critical analysis. They reject moralizing coming from ancient holy books as primitive and dangerous and the cause of centuries of bloodshed fighting over just whose fairy tales support whose moralizing the best.

    FYI Alfred Wallace and Charles Darwin have been dead for quite a long time now and science is literally light years ahead of where they were. You’re not going to topple 150 years of scientific research done by millions of trained scientists all over the world by nit-picking at what one of the co-discoverers of the very beginning of this research might have said.

    Christians aren’t yet claiming to have discovered evolution Bob, but all of their colleges and universities that teach science have been teaching it for decades now haven’t they Bob? Some of the most important advances in our knowledge of just how natural selection works have been made by Christian scientists.

  219. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Nice smarmy response. I didnt say atheism is a religion, but it is. You might have missed the radio show we did last month where the supposed Christian who preaches evolution said it was a very moral system. You get your morals from critical analysis? Please. Moral laws presume a moral lawgiver. Who would that be? Do you assume no absolutes?

    Why is it bad when I pick out a “bad” qoute from one of the dead guys but not when you do. Flew is right here in your lifetime – any comments?

    And one more just for fun. How can you as an evolutionist define consciousness?

    Natural selection is God induced micro evolution.

  220. Boris said

    Bob said: Nice smarmy response. I didnt say atheism is a religion, but it is. You might have missed the radio show we did last month where the supposed Christian who preaches evolution said it was a very moral system.

    Boris says: I turned it off because the host of the show was extremely uninformed, rude and obviously worried the guy might make sense to his listeners.

    Bob said: You get your morals from critical analysis? Please. Moral laws presume a moral lawgiver. Who would that be? Do you assume no absolutes?

    Boris says: Who cares about moral laws or absolutism? The only laws that mean ANYTHING on this planet are the ones WE decide on. Your moral laws are your own business.

    Bob said: Why is it bad when I pick out a “bad” qoute from one of the dead guys but not when you do. Flew is right here in your lifetime – any comments?

    Boris says: Do you know who Anthony Flip-Flop Flew is or what he is? He’s a British philosopher, not any kind of scientist. I don’t care what he or anyone else believes. That’s your concern Bob, not any atheists.

    Bob said: And one more just for fun. How can you as an evolutionist define consciousness?

    Boris says: All animals have different levels and kinds of consciousness Bob. Some animals besides humans even have languages. I think the porpoises are known to have the highest known vocabulary, I believe probably ranking right above creationists as far as zoologists can tell.

    Bob said: Natural selection is God induced micro evolution.

    Boris says: See? I told you. God is slowly being given credit for evolution. Following your logic then Bob, macro evolution is simply God induced micro evolution over millions of years.

  221. Boris said

    But, back to the atheism-as-religion issue. I can understand one mistakenly equating “evangelical atheists” with t.v. evangelists or Mormon missionaries, but this is only because there is no other social construct into which atheism will easily fit. I do talk to religious friends and family about my atheism, particularly when I see their religions doing harm by teaching intolerance and by dividing people into the saved and the damned; but I am not trying to sell them my belief, I am simply asking them to re-examine their own in the light of science and all we understand about humanity and the natural world.

    Also, atheism does not have the daily impact on my life that a religious adherent’s beliefs have on her life. I do not reference atheism when I decide whom to vote for, or how to raise my child or strengthen my marriage, or how to deal with the myriad of moral judgments I make in a day. Because these judgments are formed without reference to a god or gods, I believe I am behaving in the same way that I would if I was born into a world that was majority atheist. But, in the eyes of many fundamentalist Christians, Mormons and the Taliban, to name a few, the idea of living in a world without reference to religion is horrifying, because they believe that religion is all that keeps us from behaving cruelly, amorally, and selfishly. It is both sad and appalling that so many people think they, themselves, would be thieves, adulterers, rapists and killers if it were not for their religion holding them to the straight and narrow. How awful.

    All religions basically provide a moral path by way of myths and traditions that explain creation, nature and state of the world. Atheism provides no moral path to follow, nor any myths for guidance. It is not a religion, but simply the name we give people, like myself, who have no supernatural beliefs. You wouldn’t call a person who doesn’t believe in ghosts just a different type of paranormalist*, or a person who doesn’t believe in alien visitation just a different type of UFO phenomenonologist*. While people like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens may seem every bit as evangelical in their promotion of atheism as Benny Hinn and Pat Robertson are in reaping souls for their god (and dollars for their pockets), Dawkins and Hitchens likely would not bother with their proselytizing if they and their fellow atheists were in the majority. In a majority-atheist country (and world), they would have no need to convince others of the catastrophic damage they see committed by and for religion in the past, present and future.

    One final reason why atheism is not a religion: it provides neither the security-blanket comfort that many religious people find in their faith, nor the abdication of self-control to a “higher power” that can keep “sinners” on the wagon. Atheists do find some comfort in knowing that there isn’t some vengeful god out there ready to kick your behind (or the other side of that coin: a benevolent god too lazy to be bothered with Darfur or Iraq or AIDS), but that’s little solace compared to the womb-like peace religion can give some people.

    On the other hand, there is also a measure of peace in knowing that we bipedal, hairless apes have evolved enough to change the world, stop warring with each other and repair the environment… If we want to. Maybe if we evolve our way out of religious belief, we’ll realize this is the only world we have, and act accordingly.

  222. F. L. A. said

    Bob, I was just curious.
    Were you implying within post#213 that you believe Christians have NOT burned and destroyed inummeral works of literature[among other things] over the centuries?
    For it has been well documented in history.
    By Christians.
    Would you like a list of examples?
    And don’t be foolish by trying to equate my comment “I cannot provide you with an exact number, but believe me, there have been a lot.” with your strange idea that evolutionists believe that they have all of this evidence supporting evolution, yet they just can’t produce any of it.
    For we do and we have. What you choose to do WITH IT is your fault, not ours.

  223. Bob Griffin said

    Boris 220

    Everyone I talked to couldnt figure out where the guest was coming from. I guess you 2 think alike.

    Your views on morals are funny. Moral laws are you own business? How can you have morals wout any absolutes?

    Now we have atheists having to be scientists only? What difference does is make if Flew is a philosopher? He was still an atheist who looked at ID and changed his mind.

    Another smarmy bust on creationists, but please use your superior brain to tell me how consciousness happened by the process of evolution.

    Small changes w/in species are arranged by God. Changes between 2 different types of animals are fiction.

  224. F. L. A. said

    Perhaps you should try talking to people who don’t agree with you[So you know, what we are doing here is not “talking”].
    Small changes within a species[you still have not convinced me that you actually understand the meaning of this word] are arranged by God…via the use of evolution[which is the point that the guest was trying to make, which you and those you talked to could not understand, somehow].
    And small changes lead to other small changes, which in time turn into big changes, until……eventually……MACRO-EVOLUTION.
    And what was once one species has now become more than one species[But wait! There’s more!], and they just keep on gaining more and more small changes…..Come on Bob, it’s really not that hard to understand any of this. I can almost understand how your personal pride or theological beliefs might make all of this seem unbearable, but it need not be this way for you.
    One can actually combine evolution and Christianity together into a somewhat compatible belief system[although it would be easier on you if you were not a Christian].
    Would you like some ideas on how[huge sharp-toothed grin]?

  225. Boris said

    Everyone I talked to couldnt figure out where the guest was coming from. I guess you 2 think alike.

    Boris says: No you and the people you talked to don’t think, but you do creationists do THAT alike. Of course you don’t understand what people are talking about when they discuss evolution Bob. If you understood evolution you would not be able to reject it.

    Your views on morals are funny. Moral laws are you own business? How can you have morals wout any absolutes?

    Boris says: How can you have morals when you’ve adopted the morals of others? Are you so backward you can’t decide on your own morals?

    Now we have atheists having to be scientists only? What difference does is make if Flew is a philosopher? He was still an atheist who looked at ID and changed his mind.

    Boris says: Who cares? Flew also does not believe in the Christian God or creationism, so why do you think you can use him to support your creationist position? ID was debunked a long time ago and this whole hoax was only perpetrated in the US and it made us the laughingstock of the rest of the scientific world.

    Another smarmy bust on creationists, but please use your superior brain to tell me how consciousness happened by the process of evolution.

    Boris says: Stop asking for information you can easily find in the library and wouldn’t be asking in the first place if you had paid attention or showed some interest in science in school. The burden of proof is not on me. The burden of proof is on you to first prove consciousness didn’t evolve, second prove consciousness could not have happened through evolution and third prove the consciousness of all animals just popped into existence just like we find it today. Don’t post anything else until you’ve done those three things because if you cannot do this, you are wasting space on this thread with your nonsense and question begging.

    Small changes w/in species are arranged by God. Changes between 2 different types of animals are fiction.

    Boris says: Again prove they are fiction Bob. You aren’t qualified to make that statement and the fact that you think you even could be exhibits the kind of arrogance that borders on insanity. You have this insatiable taste for the infinite yet you cannot even conceive of a span of a few millions of years out of 13.9 billion. Now answer MY questions and respond to my challenge.

  226. Bob Griffin said

    F.L.A.

    I was saying that you mention many books that can be proved more reliable than the bible, but show me none. I can get you a list of some if you would like. Still waiting on the info about the finches.

    As to micro v macro, no , I dont get it. All the species I see are by kind. Cats have cats, dogs have dogs. All you can tell me is we are all trans forms. My response is, since millions of species have supposedly been doing this for millions of years, we should see some living transitional forms. It looks to me like all things were created at once.

  227. Bob Griffin said

    Boris

    Just got the book by Antony Flew. It says on the cover he is an ATHEIST. You think I dont know he doesnt go all the way to the Christian God? But he does disavow evolution. You can do that w/out believing in any god or creationism.

    You think each persons morals are ok? Laughable. That will only lead to chaos.

    As for the burden of proof, wake up. Your theory is force fed to the whole world, thus its very reasonable for you to have to defend it. ( Did I consciously just write this, or is it all a dream?). I have qoutes from EVOLUTIONISTS who admit they cant explain consciousness. At least they are honest.

    How did you get to 13.9 billion? Did the earth age again?

  228. Boris said

    Bob I gave you a list of obvious living transitional forms and you made an uneducated and absurd claim about it.

    Your belief about there being “kinds” of animals comes strictly from the Bible and not any kind of science. There is no such term in science. The scientific method of taxonomical classification is the Linnean system which you should have had memorized by no later than the 8th grade Bob. The steps of the Linnean ladder: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus and species. There is no such thing as “kinds” of animals which is just more proof that whoever wrote the Bible knew almost nothing about nature.

    Bob said: Just got the book by Antony Flew. It says on the cover he is an ATHEIST. You think I dont know he doesnt go all the way to the Christian God? But he does disavow evolution. You can do that w/out believing in any god or creationism.

    Boris says: No biologists are “disavowing” evolution and Flew said he has some doubts about evolution. You just discredited yourself again Bob.

    Bob says: You think each persons morals are ok? Laughable. That will only lead to chaos.

    Boris says: Prove that absurd statement. As long as people obey the law their personal morals are no one elses business. You make the most childish and naive claims. Of course you can’t prove ANY of them.

    Bob said: As for the burden of proof, wake up. Your theory is force fed to the whole world, thus its very reasonable for you to have to defend it. ( Did I consciously just write this, or is it all a dream?). I have qoutes from EVOLUTIONISTS who admit they cant explain consciousness. At least they are honest.

    Boris says: I’m not defending evolution and neither is anyone else. Evolution is not under any kind of attack nor is its validity being questioned by the scientific community. Neither is it being force fed on anyone. You are as free to be as ignorant of science as you wish. The only group of people who have a problem with evolution are the exact same people who have denied and resisted every scientific discovery of the last 1700 years – literal Bible believers. Fear of change coupled with scientific ignorance is what drives this kind of belief.

    Bob said: How did you get to 13.9 billion? Did the earth age again?

    Boris says: That is the approximate age of the universe. Do you know how we know? We have a radio signal from 13.9 billion years ago. Turn on your radio to WTRU and move the dial until you hear mostly static. About 5 percent of that noise is the big bang Bob, just getting here now for your radio enjoyment. Turn on, tune in and drop out of that cult your in Bob.

  229. Bob Griffin said

    Boris

    Just time for one now. An example for morals impacting others: I become an atheist tomorrow. I suddenly decide I dont like my neighbor playing loud music. I walk over and shoot him. My morality says I should kill any soulless blob of DNA who violates my space. Why do you need laws if everyone has their own morals? What anyone does should be ok.

  230. Maz said

    Bob: You’re absolutely right there. I could have my own set of morals too….everyone could choose their own set of morals, and there would be an almighty mess in the world!
    Keep up the good work, although I don’t think it will make an iota of difference.

  231. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    How do you know I made it to the 8th grade?

    Unlike you, I can admit when I may have made a mistake. Not sure if Flew disavowed evolution, but I will tell you when I finish the book. The cover of the book refers to Flews “Theology and Falsification”, the most widely reprinted philosophical publication of the last 50 years. He was a very influential atheist. So why does it matter that he wasnt a scientist?

    Read a biology book – like I did last week – and you will see that Darwin if force fed to everyone. Darwin himself said we should have discussion on both sides of the issue – funny how evolutionists dont want any discussion.

    I was just messing with you with the 13.9 billion. I knew what it referred to, just curious as to what you come up with for proof of it. Can I hear the big bang if I listen to rock and roll instead of WTRU?

  232. F. L. A. said

    Bob, do you mean you want to know where I found three more species of Galapagos Finches than you? Just look it up on Wikipedia and read their names. It’s listed under the section of Taxonomy, but by all means don’t stop your reading there.

    I said “of equal or greater value”, but of course this would depend on what you would personally consider to be of good value.Do you really wish for me to list some that IIIII consider to be of equal or greater value? For the type of Christian that you seem to be, I have an idea that you would not consider any of them to be of equal or any value, save as a means to try and….”glorify” your own theological belief system, somehow.
    As for those literary works that were destroyed before and during the Dark ages one can sadly only speculate.
    The Earth is always aging Bob. And I like chaos.
    What you described in post #229 is called a sociopath, and NOBODY ANYWHERE with any good sense would willingly agree with such actions and thinking.Sociopaths do not have morality. One dose not need be Christian, Pagan, or Atheistic to understand this.Not even wild animals follow this kind of thinking.
    You could have used any number of better examples to try and make your point, I think.
    It it interesting how Christians such as yourself always seem to equate evolutionary thought with Atheism, and then equate those two with immorality and evil. Ever hear of the Grand Inquisition?

  233. F. L. A. said

    And Bob, you also never addressed my question with post#207 about why you think that an expanding universe in consistent with the second law of Thermodynamics.

  234. ADB said

    Bob and Maz,
    If I could add for clarification, I think you would both agree that anyone can be “moral” as we normally use the term. I’m not siding with Boris, but simply making the point that people of all faiths or no faith can be decent law-abiding citizens. This is of course inherently related to our cherished concept of salvation by grace. Anyway, back to the debate over evolution.

    Best Wishes

  235. Maz said

    ADB: Yes I would agree with that. But, before I was a Christian I did not hold to some of the moral standards I do now. Living for Christ not only changed my life for the better, but also I want to please God my Father by living according to His Word.

  236. ADB said

    Yes Maz, we’re on the same page.

  237. John said

    Before Ferox’s relationship with me Ferox was completely evil.
    But NOW[!], after 12 years of teaching Ferox my good morals and ethics, Ferox is now only 3/5ths evil.

    Siiiigh…[tired smile].

  238. F. L. A. said

    [Eternal Grin]

  239. Boris said

    Bob blurted: Just time for one now. An example for morals impacting others: I become an atheist tomorrow. I suddenly decide I dont like my neighbor playing loud music. I walk over and shoot him. My morality says I should kill any soulless blob of DNA who violates my space. Why do you need laws if everyone has their own morals? What anyone does should be ok.

    Boris says: We need laws to protect us from people like you Bob. You just admitted that if you thought there was no God you would murder someone if they made you angry. Anyone who make that claim must be inclined only to do evil. You’re a pathetic excuse for a human being according to your own self-description. Plus your attempt to smear atheism by claiming that atheists kill people is ridiculous. How do explain the fact that atheists don’t go around shooting people Bob?

    Maz munbled: Bob: You’re absolutely right there. I could have my own set of morals too….everyone could choose their own set of morals, and there would be an almighty mess in the world!

    Boris says: If what these two people said were true then we should see our prisons full of atheists. But the opposite is the case. In our federal prison system only .02 percent (2 out of a thousand) prisoners are atheists. 84 percent are Christians. Our country is somewhere between 14 and 22 percent atheist so there is a disproportionally small number of atheists in federal prisons while the percentage of Christians in federal prisons is higher than the percentage of Christians in the general population. Touche Bob and Maz. Explain THAT!

  240. Boris said

    Bob said: How do you know I made it to the 8th grade?
    Unlike you, I can admit when I may have made a mistake.

    Boris says: I think WTRU should have found out that you did not complete secondary school before they put you on the air as some sort of scientific expert. There are a few people that have at least spent a few hours on a college campus who are creationists. You’d think WTRU could have had one of them on instead of someone who obviously never took freshman English such as you quite obviously never did.

    Bob said: Not sure if Flew disavowed evolution, but I will tell you when I finish the book. The cover of the book refers to Flews “Theology and Falsification”, the most widely reprinted philosophical publication of the last 50 years. He was a very influential atheist. So why does it matter that he wasnt a scientist?

    Boris says: Because he’s not a biologist. I wouldn’t listen to Flew criticize the way Tony Larussa manages baseball either because he isn’t an expert on THAT either, nor do we need him expounding on say oceanography. In all those fields we have experts that can tell us much more than Flew can.

    Bob said: Read a biology book – like I did last week – and you will see that Darwin if force fed to everyone. Darwin himself said we should have discussion on both sides of the issue – funny how evolutionists dont want any discussion.

    Boris says: For scientists who use evolution in the laboratory, discussion over its validity is like discussing whether the earth is round or flat. It’s round and evolution is real. Case closed. You can discuss it all you want but you are wasting your time. If anyone could disprove any part of evolution that would have been done a long time ago. You cannot disprove something with arguments and especially the nonsensical dogma ridden circular arguments creationists keep using. Evolution would have to be disproved with experiments and demonstrations and creationists simply cannot do those things. They wouldn’t know where to begin. Real scientists have attempted to falsify evolution and still subject it to proofs every day. And every day evolution passes the tests Bob. Every day. If it didn’t, you probably would have been dead of some disease that was common before the discovery of evolution. Creationists need to explain how scientists could not eradicate diseases before the discovery of how nature structures itself through evolution by natural selection.

    Bob said: I was just messing with you with the 13.9 billion. I knew what it referred to, just curious as to what you come up with for proof of it. Can I hear the big bang if I listen to rock and roll instead of WTRU?

    Boris says: You have absolutely no understanding at all about what science is and what science does. Scientists don’t need dogmatic proofs of things like the Big Bang. We have a radio signal, an expanding universe, gamma ray bursts and all kinds of diverse information that all points to the same thing. So the Big Bang is a very educated guess as to how the mass-energy that had always existed transformed into the universe in its present form. Anyone who claims another beginning to the present state of the universe must explain exactly what this radio signal is, why the universe keeps expanding, how something could possibly come from nothing and show conclusively with scientific data that the Big Bang definitely did NOT happen. Until then the Big Bang is the standing explanation for the universe. You’ll just have to live with that for the rest of your life Bob. Get used to it.

  241. Bob Griffin said

    F.L.A.

    You want me to trust Wikipedia? Being a Christian has nothing to do w my doubting evolution. You trumpet the fact that evolution tells how we evolved from 1 species to another, then try to tout small changes w/in 1 species as showing me evolution in action. I dont buy it.

    If 229 describe a sociopath, thats what evolution gets you. My morals come from God – please tell me where yours come from. To each his own would apply very well.

    I do equate evolution with atheism and evil – thats what history shows us. Where do you see Christianity now vs atheism?

  242. Boris – Is this really necessary?

    “….instead of someone who obviously never took freshman English such as you quite obviously never did.”

    – Moderator

  243. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    Youre killing me again. Did you get enough schooling to understand what a hypothetical situation is? And the bible tells us that all are evil, which the world shows us. I would be a pathetic excuse for a human being by my definition if I had become an ATHEIST.

    I would have to check your prison stats, but that wouldnt surprise me. The bible says we are all evil, so more Christians should be in jail. By the way, 84 + 22 = 106 percent. Did you finish 6th grade?

    Unlike you, Im not smart enough to comment on a book until ive read it. Ill get back to you when I do.

    What experiment in the lab proves evolution? Darwin said have discussion, but I guess in your infinite wisdom the case is closed.

    Im trying to figure out if youre more full of pride or arrogance. I agree w the Big Bang, just not how it happened. You tell me science doesnt need proof and you have an educated guess about it. You cant prove your theory exactly (but I bet you think so)

  244. Bob Griffin said

    Moderator

    Hes killin me again. I did take freshman English, but Im always tired and pressed for time and typing fast. Now Ill await the expected smarmy response.

  245. Bob Griffin said

    F.L.A.

    2nd law says that left to themselves, things break down. Entropy in the universe is continually increasing (stars burning out). If matter is winding down, it had to be fully wound up at one time.

  246. Boris said

    Bob said: You want me to trust Wikipedia? Being a Christian has nothing to do w my doubting evolution. You trumpet the fact that evolution tells how we evolved from 1 species to another, then try to tout small changes w/in 1 species as showing me evolution in action. I dont buy it.

    Boris says: Nobody is asking you to buy it either yet you claim you are being “force-fed.” Are you kidding me? The Indians and Chinese and Pakistanis and the Russians all WANT us to teach creationism to our students. They want their jobs, the ones they won’t be qualified for in scientific enterprises.

    Bob said: If 229 describe a sociopath, thats what evolution gets you.

    Boris says: I just gave statistics that proved Christians are 10 to 100 times more likely to commit a crime that winds them up in federal prison, which you can check on the Internet, than are atheists. So that isn’t what evolution gets you and the fact that you would still make that claim proves that you care nothing at all for the truth but only your own warped and VERY sick opinions.

    Bob said: My morals come from God –

    Boris says: So if you thought was telling you to shoot your noisy unbelieving neighbor, would you do it? Don’t keep ignoring my questions just because they embarrass you. Answer this question. We all want to know the answer there killer.

    Bob said: please tell me where yours come from. To each his own would apply very well.

    Boris says: My morals and ethics come from experience and critical analysis as I told you before. Stop asking the same dumb questions over and over and over again man. It’s ridiculous.

    Bob said: I do equate evolution with atheism and evil – thats what history shows us.

    Boris says: History shows no such thing. In a previous thread I documented over 2 billion brutal deaths directly related to religion, mostly Christianity. No one ever killed one person to spread atheism or belief in evolution. The fact that atheists became power-mad communist dictators and their actions are blamed for causing millions of people to starve to death, about 20 million each in China and Russia has nothing to do with atheism. These were people who refused to buy into the new economic systems in very bad economic times and it can’t be shown that most of these people wouldn’t have starved to death under any other system coming into control. People were starving by the millions in these countries anyway which is why the communists took over and how they were able to win support and take control. Christian propagandists, especially self-proclaimed poorly educated ones like Bob Griffin should study the facts before they spread lies they picked up from other fundamentalist historical revisionists (a nice word for liars).

  247. Boris said

    Bob said: Youre killing me again. Did you get enough schooling to understand what a hypothetical situation is? And the bible tells us that all are evil, which the world shows us. I would be a pathetic excuse for a human being by my definition if I had become an ATHEIST.

    Boris says: I resent that because NO ONE in my family is evil. None of my friends are evil. And your slam against atheism, which is simply a harmless lack of belief in deities is no different than saying you would be a pathetic excuse for a human being if you were a black man.

    Bob said: I would have to check your prison stats, but that wouldnt surprise me. The bible says we are all evil, so more Christians should be in jail. By the way, 84 + 22 = 106 percent. Did you finish 6th grade?

    Boris says: Huh? What does 84 + 22 represent Bob? I think I know what you are getting at but the whole country is not divided into atheists and Christians Bob. There are people of all religions in this country and almost half the people who claim to believe in God are really deists as most of our founding fathers were. Plus you don’t consider Catholics Christians so that makes 20 to 30 million Christians in this country tops.

    Bob said: Unlike you, Im not smart enough to comment on a book until ive read it. Ill get back to you when I do.

    Boris says: I didn’t comment on Flew’s book, I commented on stuff he’s written that I happen to have right in front of me.

    Bob said: What experiment in the lab proves evolution? Darwin said have discussion, but I guess in your infinite wisdom the case is closed.

    Boris says: Why do you keep asking questions you could find the answers to just about anywhere? Go ask the people who make insect poison for farmers if evolution is real Bob and what their REAL LIFE experience has proved over the last hundred or so years. Insect poison has been in a losing race with evolution and has caused such mutation that it has literally bred brand new species of bugs that did not exist a few decades ago. All the proof you’ll ever need buddy. Check it out.

    Bob said: Im trying to figure out if youre more full of pride or arrogance. I agree w the Big Bang, just not how it happened. You tell me science doesnt need proof and you have an educated guess about it. You cant prove your theory exactly (but I bet you think so)

    Boris says: Theories are explanations not proofs. Again your scientific ignorance is showing. And again, science routinely DISPROVES things all the time and creationism is one of those things that has been disproved. Prove that it hasn’t been Bob. The burden of proof is on you, the one with the ridiculous claims, not science.

  248. Boris said

    2nd law says that left to themselves, things break down. Entropy in the universe is continually increasing (stars burning out).

    Boris says: Bob you never cease to contradict yourself. There are also billions of brand new stars, many much like our sun being formed as we speak. As a matter of fact if we look out through a telescope like Hubble we see galaxies and stars in all stages of life, being born, burning for billions of years and those which are burning out. How do creationists explain that?

  249. Boris said

    Bob said: You want me to trust Wikipedia? Being a Christian has nothing to do w my doubting evolution.

    Boris says: Is there anyone reading this who believes this statement? Because if you do you can read Bob’s own words pasted below culled from the above posts that prove the ONLY reason he doubts evolution, cosmology, geology and ALL other modern science is solely because of his Christianity and literal Bible belief and NO other reason.

    Bob said: I think the 6000 year figure is good, but like many things in the bible you cant be exactly sure.

    Bob said: I just believe it is arranged by God, not by blind processes.

    Boris says: Here Bob tries to defend his Christian beliefs by falsely claiming some scientists were Christians like him:

    Bob said:Post 129: Heres a small list for you. These would be scientists who were Christians. Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Brahe, Descartes, Boyle, Newton, Pascal, Ampere, Pasteur and Mendel. Newton looked at his discoveries as showing the genius of Gods handiwork. This would prove your earlier smug diatribe as wrong.

    Boris says: In the next few posts Bob uses the Bible to defend his beliefs about science including the fact that ONLY reason he believes the world is round is because he thinks the BIBLE tells him so.

    Bob said:Post 136: Speaking of flat earthers, the Bible talks about it being round. Did you know that?

    Bob said:145:The bible doesnt say the sun revolves around the earth.

    Bob said:Too tired tonite to look it up, but the bible says its round.

    Bob said:159: What any Bible character did is more plausible than the big bang – how does nothing from nothing give us something?

    Boris says: This post below proves absolutely that Bob is NOT telling the truth when he claims his Christianity has nothing to do with his staunch denial of the facts of evolution and his blatant disregard for truth:

    Bob said:I believe the Bible, which had over 60 prophecies come true in the person of Jesus. You believe in an unobservable fairy tale by your atheist friends.

    Bob said:204So in your lifetime, would you rather live under a country run by commie/atheist/evolutionists or Christians?

    Bob said:I think GOD got 3 billion base pairs in order. You think a MINDLESS PROCESS got them in order. Ill stick w my view.

    Bob said:Please. Moral laws presume a moral lawgiver. Who would that be?

    Bob said:The Bible can be proven true more than any ancient book ever written.

    Bob said:Natural selection is God induced micro evolution.

    Bob said:Small changes w/in species are arranged by God.

    Bob said:I was saying that you mention many books that can be proved more reliable than the bible, but show me none. I can get you a list of some if you would like.

    Boris says: Then after telling a big fat lie and getting caught in it what does Bob have the gall to say:

    216I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

    Anyone can clearly see that Bob Griffin does not tell the truth. This isn’t the only post where Bob has been proved to be extremely dishonest. I have to question the integrity and intelligence of the people running WTRU for letting this man defend what is basically their same views on the public airways. He has obviously discredited himself, all the stock creationist delusions and WTRU in a very short time. No one should take any of these things seriously.

  250. Maz said

    As Bob says in #241, his morals come from God, as do mine as I said in #235. There are no absolute morals outside of God, if anyone is an atheist, even if he or she isn’t intrinsically evil, they still live by their own laws and not Gods. People without God usually make their own minds up about what laws they want to follow and which they don’t.
    As the Bible tells us, they do what is right in their own eyes….but what is right for them is not always right for someone else. Gods laws are really the best laws to live by, but you can only really hope to live by them if you have the One who made them in the first place, living inside you.
    And where does our conscience come from then if it does not come from God?
    What makes a law good or bad?
    Only believing in God does it all make sense.

  251. Maz said

    Truth Talk: Debate and discussion is good….but throwing mud is not. How long do we watch the mud fly? Maybe we should all be reminded of the rules again?

  252. Boris – We’ll ask you one last time to please tone it down. Your belligerence is getting the best of you and robbing you of intelligence.

    Thank you,
    Moderator

  253. Bob Griffin said

    Maz and Moderator

    I think Boris is fun.

  254. Bob Griffin said

    Boris

    We are being force fed. Why dont you want creationism taught like the others?

    I took statistics in college. But I dont need that to know that a higher percentage of Christians in the population would give them a greater chance of being in whatever category you decide.

    A dumb question? Lets say I come from a tribe of cannibals and move into the house next to you. My morals come from my experience and critical analysis. Would you now accept my morals? Would I shoot my neighbor? What part of HYPOTHETICAL dont you understand?

    Atheists have killed more people in our lifetime than anyone else. Thats the fact Jack.

  255. Bob Griffin said

    Boris

    Glad to hear your family is not evil.

    I put in the 84 + 22 to remind you that someone with a “holier than thou” and ” I know it all” attitude should try to be correct all the time. And you did spell Flews name wrong too.

    Experiments that prove micro. Im impressed.

    What has science disproved about creationism? If theories are explanations and not proofs, then how can you prove anything?

  256. Maz said

    Bob: As long as you are enjoying the onslaught of personal vilification, but is it really necessary that’s the question?
    Since coming onto this site I have seen a lot of ‘intense dislike’ and terribly negative attitudes from atheists. I can debate anyone if they leave out the personal abuse about someones intelligence and the like, but it is also directed against God aswell, and that is really unacceptable to me.
    They can say they don’t believe in Him and why, quote all there is to quote from atheistic web sites to uphold their views, but personal insults against God and His people, I think, should not be part of these debates.

  257. Boris said

    Bob said: We are being force fed. Why dont you want creationism taught like the others?

    Boris says: Boris says: What others? Creationism isn’t science it’s a religious hoax. We don’t teach the religious superstitions of a particular cult as science in the public schools. No nation does that, even the Islamic countries. Otherwise we would have to teach Spaghetti Monsterism too because there is a lot better evidence for the Flying Spaghetti Monster than there is for the Christian God. I’ve been touched by His noodly appendage myself. Prove I haven’t. Praise the Pasta!

    Bob said: I took statistics in college. But I dont need that to know that a higher percentage of Christians in the population would give them a greater chance of being in whatever category you decide.

    Boris says: Nonsense. Christians are more likely to commit a crime that winds them up in federal prison than people from any other religious group. That is what the statistics prove. The conclusions is: therefore Christian morals and ethics should be shunned as inferior to all other types.

    Bob said: A dumb question? Lets say I come from a tribe of cannibals and move into the house next to you. My morals come from my experience and critical analysis. Would you now accept my morals? Would I shoot my neighbor? What part of HYPOTHETICAL dont you understand?

    Boris says: How many tribes of cannibals live in the US at the present time? You think you ask hypothetical questions but your questions are so absurd an eight year old would scoff at them.

    Bob said: Atheists have killed more people in our lifetime than anyone else. Thats the fact Jack.

    Boris says: That is NOT a fact it is a vicious lie. I demanded a list of who these atheists were, who they killed and how many within a million or so and when; and you could not provide ANY of this information because it doesn’t exist. Your claim is a boldfaced lie and you know it Bob. You cannot argue against the logic of atheism so you attempt to smear it as dangerous proving you have already lost the debate. Communists killed people Bob. And I just showed in a previous post that most of those people starved to death and would have under Christian leadership or any other too. There was nothing that could be done about this tragedy. No one ever once killed to spread atheism in this world.

    Bob said: Glad to hear your family is not evil.

    Boris says: You cannot make the same claim. I am aware of the propaganda and lies you’ve packed your son’s head with. Anyone who tells their child or any child they must believe something that they themselves cannot prove is a child abuser.

    Bob said: I put in the 84 + 22 to remind you that someone with a “holier than thou” and ” I know it all” attitude should try to be correct all the time. And you did spell Flews name wrong too. Experiments that prove micro. Im impressed.What has science disproved about creationism? If theories are explanations and not proofs, then how can you prove anything?

    Boris says: What do I need to prove Bob? Science has proved that the first woman was not formed from a man’s rib and that the world was not created in six days by a magic fairy named Yahweh 6162 years ago. Science does not support your creationist delusions and you know it.

  258. Bob Griffin said

    Boris 249

    Youre killing me again. You know what you do when you assume? On one of the previous shows I said that even if there was no religion, I would still not believe in evolution. All that work you did in post 249 and I can refute you in a few words.

  259. Maz said

    Truth Talk: Is using Gods name in a very derogative vain blaspheme? Is this something that is allowed on this site?

  260. Boris said

    I didn’t get on this thread to debate evolution with scientific illiterates. Still I have completely exposed creationism as a religious fraud perpetrated by religious fanatics and compulsive liars. I have patiently given science lessons to the unfortunates who have bought into the lies of creationism. If anyone thinks I haven’t shown Bob Griffin’s absurd claims and statements to be false, then shame on you. You are among the hopelessly lost in this world. And yes, you ARE in THIS world whether you like it or not and it is the only place you will ever exist. Below is an explanation of the difference between facts and theories.
    Again, I’ve provided the exact information requested of me. I would like to point out that ALL of my requests for evidence or information have been completely ignored by Bob Griffin and any other creation delusionists.

    The late eminent paleontologist Stephen J. Gould explains the issue as follows:

    Evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world’s data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein’s theory of gravitation replaced Newton’s, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin’s proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.

    The theoretical area of evolution is with regard to the mechanisms by which the historically factual process of evolution occurred. While we know for certain that evolution did occur because we have the data—the data are the facts, we use scientific theory to explain the data. That’s what scientific theories do: explain data. When it comes to explaining the data, not only is evolutionary theory a theory, it cannot become a fact. Theories explain data. Facts are data. So it’s not like we call natural selection a theory of evolution because we simply do not have enough evidence to call it a fact yet. We call it a theory because it explains the data. It will never be a fact. Indeed, if fact was a latter rung on the ladder (hypothesis–> theory –> fact) we would have been calling natural selection a fact for a long time by now. Natural selection is not the only scientific theory of evolution. There are others such as genetic drift and punctuated equilibrium theory. Natural selection, however, is the only process by which complex functionality can evolve.

  261. Boris said

    Youre killing me again. You know what you do when you assume? On one of the previous shows I said that even if there was no religion, I would still not believe in evolution. All that work you did in post 249 and I can refute you in a few words.

    Boris says: The only person you have refuted on this thread is yourself which I keep pointing out. You can make any claim you want but anyone who has read our little give and take and believes one word YOU say ought to have their head examined. Where’s my list of atheist killers Bob? Don’t keep ignoring my requests to back up your insane lies Bob.

  262. Maz said

    The only thing that stops me from completely going into outrage and offensive mode is my relationship with my amazing Savior Jesus Christ, and my Father God, the most patient, long suffering and loving Person that could ever exist.
    Crucifying our Lord was not enough for sinful man to do 2000 years ago, but they continue in their unbelief and ignorance of the greatest love that ever existed, the love that drove Jesus, the Son of God to the torture of the Roman cross. What is so amazing beyond comprehension, is that He did it for ALL mankind……even those who dispitefully mock and abuse Him and His Father to this very day.
    I thank my God and Savior for showing so much faithfulness and love to me by taking me out of the life I once was in and changing me into the person I am today.
    I’d rather be the ME I am today, than the selfish sinful ME I was years ago.

  263. Boris said

    Moderator,
    I know you are trying to be fair but you are not. Your own cultural prejudices cause you to flatly ignore some of the insults that are routinely hurled at atheists on this thread. I find the following statement extremely offensive. I Bob Griffin should be at least warned about making these rude comments not to mention telling one lie after another just to rile his opposition and coax them into insulting him.

    I would be a pathetic excuse for a human being by my definition if I had become an ATHEIST.

    Moderator, are you going to let this insult stand? What if he said he would be pathetic excuse for a human being if he was a say a black man or a Jew?

  264. Boris said

    Blasphemy is a victimless crime until proved otherwise. No one can insult something that does not exist. What makes Christians so angry is that it is their insane religious superstitions that are being mocked by atheists and other free-thinkers. They have a lot of nerve trying to deflect this criticism away from themselves and toward a false God.

  265. Anonymous said

    It is strange to witness the passion with which some secular figures rail against the misdeeds of the Crusaders and Inquisitors more than 500 years ago. The number sentenced to death by the Spanish Inquisition appears to be about 10,000. Some historians contend that an additional 100,000 died in jail due to malnutrition or illness.

    These figures are tragic, and of course population levels were much lower at the time. But even so, they are minuscule compared with the death tolls produced by the atheist despotisms of the 20th century. In the name of creating their version of a religion-free utopia, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong produced the kind of mass slaughter that no Inquisitor could possibly match. Collectively these atheist tyrants murdered more than 100 million people. – Dinesh D’Souza

  266. Boris said

    Again, some religious fanatic repeats stock Christian lies. Adolph Hitler was a devout Christian until the day the atheist Russians found his burned body. There was never a more Christian nation than Hitler’s Germany. Creationism was taught as science in the Nazi public schools and this did not end until 1961. This fact is easy to check. Not only were 6 million Jews slaughtered by evangelical Nazis but 5 million other non-Christians were murdered simply because they denied Christ.

    The holocaust deniers are the Christians themselves because the Christian holocaust was a totally Christian deed done by only evangelical Christians and no one else.

    Recent discoveries point to the fact that Joseph Stalin was no atheist. He never left the Russian Orthodox Church and during the siege had religious symbols paraded around the city. No atheist would have done something that stupid.

    Also, these people who died starved to death which is a far cry from being slaughtered as the above post falsely states they were. Does anyone really wonder why I don’t believe a word any Christian says? The Christian superstitions cause people to have a wreckless disregard for the truth.

  267. Boris said

    Does any Christian wish to defend these atrocities committed by the followers of their God?

    * Exodus 32: 3,000 Israelites killed by Moses for worshipping the golden calf.
    * Numbers 31: After killing all men, boys and married women among the Midianites, 32,000 virgins remain as booty for the Israelites. (If unmarried girls are a quarter of the population, then 96,000 people were killed.)
    * Joshua:
    o Joshua 8: 12,000 men and women, all the people of Ai, killed.
    o Joshua 10: Joshua completely destroys Gibeon (“larger than Ai”), Makeddah, Libnah, Lachish, Eglon, Hebron, Debir. “He left no survivors.”
    o Joshua 11: Hazor destroyed. [Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (1987), estimates the population of Hazor at ?> 50,000]
    o TOTAL: if Ai is average, 12,000 x 9 = 108,000 killed.
    * Judges 1: 10,000 Canaanites k. at Battle of Bezek. Jerusalem and Zephath destroyed.
    * Judges 3: ca. 10,000 Moabites k. at Jordan River.
    * Judges 8: 120,000 Midianite soldiers k. by Gideon
    * Judges 20: Benjamin attacked by other tribes. 25,000 killed.
    * 1 Samuel 4: 4,000 Isrealites killed at 1st Battle of Ebenezer/Aphek. 30,000 Isr. k. at 2nd battle.
    * David:
    o 2 Samuel 8: 22,000 Arameans of Damascus and 18,000 Edomites killed in 2 battles.
    o 2 Samuel 10: 40,000 Aramean footsoldiers and 7,000 charioteers killed at Helam.
    o 2 Samuel 18: 20,000 Israelites under Absalom killed at Ephraim.
    * 1 Kings 20: 100,000 Arameans killed by Israelites at Battle of Aphek. Another 27,000 killed by collapsing wall.
    * 2 Chron 13: Judah beat Israel and inflicted 500,000 casualties.
    * 2 Chron 25: Amaziah, king of Judah, k. 10,000 from Seir in battle and executed 10,000 POWs. Discharged Judean soldiers pillaged and killed 3,000.
    * 2 Chron 28: Pekah, king of Israel, slew 120,000 Judeans
    * TOTAL: That comes to about 1,283,000 mass killings specifically enumerated in the Bible. The battle of 2_Chron_13 is so much larger than all the others that we probably should doubt it.

  268. Anonymous said

    Atheism isn’t the final word, By Don Feder

    Books making the case against God seem to be multiplying, becoming more strident and absolute with each turned page. Though no one can prove or disprove God’s existence, our history reveals the unmistakable footprints of something greater than man.

    Oh, for the days when one could safely stroll into a bookstore without tripping over the latest atheist title. Ironically, by writing their tracts, in the long run atheists might boost belief.

    My local Barnes & Noble has the following titles on display — Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam ; The Quotable Atheist; Letter To A Christian Nation; God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist; and The God Delusion, which is a New York Times best-seller.

    Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., has become the first member of Congress to announce that he doesn’t believe in God. He’s probably just looking for a book deal.

    Why the sudden outpouring of atheist advocacy? Perhaps it’s a way for the cultural left to assert itself in the face of the religious right. Or maybe it’s meant to show that the anti-God argument can be framed more intelligently than in a Bill Maher monologue. Whatever the impetus, as a believer, I welcome the phenomenon. After all, the great enemy of belief isn’t disbelief but indifference.

    Let the godless write their books and the faithful answer them. The disillusionment with religion that dominated British intellectual circles after World War I helped to shape the great Christian apologist C.S. Lewis. The surviving son of atheist icon Madalyn Murray O’Hair is an evangelical Christian.

    The books referenced above assert that the debate is over and that atheism has won, but atheists have been saying that for more than 200 years. Since the French Enlightenment, the death of God has been confidently proclaimed. Religion has been made obsolete by egalitarian revolution, industrialism, or science, they insisted. Yet, early in the 21st century, faith endures.

    Outlasting the Soviet Union

    For 70-plus years, the Soviets tried everything imaginable to kill religion: show trials, mass murder of clerics, confiscations, indoctrination and even attempts to co-opt religious symbols and ceremonies. But belief survived, while scientific socialism is now defunct.

    In China, where communism’s war on God continues, the home-church movement thrives. Half a world away, America has the highest weekly church attendance in the industrialized world, notwithstanding attacks on faith from Hollywood, academia and a judiciary seemingly intent on purging religious symbols from public spaces.

    In the USA — the most science-oriented society in history — Christian bookstores, radio stations and TV programming proliferate. It seems as though a hunger for the Creator is imprinted on the human heart.

    What would a world without God look like? Well, for one, morality becomes, if not impossible, exceedingly difficult. “Thou shalt not kill” loses much of its force when reduced from commandment to a suggestion. How inspiring can it be to wake in the morning, look in the mirror, and see an accident of evolutionary history — the end product of the random collision of molecules?

    A universe that isn’t God-centered becomes ego-centered. People come to see choices through the prism of self: what promotes the individual’s well-being and happiness. Such a worldview does not naturally lead to benevolence or self-sacrifice.

    An affirmation of God can lead to the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount and the Declaration of Independence. In terms of morality, a denial of God leads nowhere.

    There are no secularist counterparts to Pope John Paul II, Mother Teresa, William Wilberforce (the evangelical responsible for abolition of the British slave trade), Martin Luther King Jr., or the Christians — from France to Poland — who rescued Jews during the Holocaust.

    True, terrible things have been done in the name of religion. Terrible things have been done in the name of every noble concept, including love, charity, loyalty and kinship. Yet, the worst horrors of the modern era were perpetrated by godless political creeds. The death toll from sectarian conflict over the ages is dwarfed by ideological violence, from the Jacobinism of Revolutionary France to the charnel houses of communism and fascism.

    This is not to say that atheism leads naturally to guillotines and gulags, but, just as “love your fellow man as yourself” can be corrupted, so too can liberty, equality and fraternity.

    Signs throughout history

    There is no irrefutable evidence for God’s existence or non-existence. But, if you look closely, his footprints can be discerned in the sands of time.

    Jews introduced the world to monotheism. They also were the first people to perceive history as linear— an unfolding story moving toward a conclusion. Is it a coincidence that this tiny, originally nomadic people generated the ideas that shaped the Western world, including equality, human rights and a responsibility to our fellow man? Jews are the only people to maintain their identity during two millennia of exile, and then return to their homeland and re-establish their nation.

    Mark Twain wrote: “The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed, and made a vast noise and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up, held their torch high for a time, but it burned out and they sit in twilight now or have vanished.

    All things are mortal but the Jew; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?” Had Twain been a believer, he might have answered his own question.

    America’s survival and rise to global pre-eminence are equally improbable. Challenging the greatest empire of the 18th century, America should never have won its independence or should have self-destructed during the Civil War.

    Alexis de Tocqueville observed that the genius of our infant republic lay not in its farms and workshops but in its churches whose “pulpits flame with righteousness.”

    Atheists are free to disbelieve and to try to propagate their disbelief in books and other intellectual forums. But saying the debate is over doesn’t make it so. A bit of humility might make their case more convincing. Then again, humility is itself a religious concept.

    Don Feder is a former syndicated columnist and author of Who’s Afraid of the Religious Right?

  269. Boris said

    Martin Luther, the founder of the Protestant religion, was a raging anti-Semite and the inspiration for Adolph Hitler’s ideas and the Christian holocaust itself.

    “What shall we do with…the Jews?…I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings…are to be taken from them.”

    “What shall we do with…the Jews?…I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews.”

    “What shall we do with…the Jews? I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach on pain of loss of life and limb.”

    “What shall we do with…the Jews?…set fire to their synagogues or schools and bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them.”

    “What shall we do with…the Jews?…their homes also should be razed and destroyed.”

    Anyone who believes that the holocaust was not inspired by Christianity itself is completely out of touch with the truth of the matter.

  270. Boris said

    My local Barnes & Noble has the following titles on display — Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam ; The Quotable Atheist; Letter To A Christian Nation; God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist; and The God Delusion, which is a New York Times best-seller.

    None of these books could have existed when Christianity ruled the world. They would have been burned by angry Christian mobs and the authors arrested tortured and murdered. This is why atheism is so important today.

    I love that babbling idiot C.S. Lewis is held up as the best ever Christian apologist. This is the idiot who came up with the false dichotomy about Jesus. He said either Jesus was who he said he was or was a liar take your pick. Lewis trips over his own stupidity with this false dichotomy. There is a third much more plausible choice which Lewis was to stupid to see which is of course the Jesus Christ never existed in the first place. C.S. Lewis is known as Mr. Dreary and Absurd among atheists.

  271. Boris said

    And here is another big fat Christian lie: A bit of humility might make their case more convincing. Then again, humility is itself a religious concept.

    Boris says: Just because the Bible mentions some commonly held ideas in no way proves or even gives any evidence that the Bible itself is where these ideas originated. Humility was around a long time before the Bible as were ideas like ‘love your neighbor’ and ‘don’t kill or steal.’ I want to puke every time I read some claim by a Christian that their religion is the foundation for all good morality and ethics. It isn’t and this is easy to prove. One of the great evils of religion is the hijacking of morality and ethics.

  272. Boris said

    I should not call C.S. Lewis an idiot on this thread should I? That could offend some people. I did this because Bob Griffin has called both atheists and all evolutionary biologists pin-heads among other rude names. I’m trying to illustrate that many Christians on this thread say some highly offensive things and get away with it when in the interest of fairness and decorum they should not. I’ve been accused of being completely incapable of having good morals and ethics simply because I’m not afraid of invisible boogymen. Anyone who bases their morals on fear that they will be punished in an afterlife is as immoral and evil as a person can get.

  273. F. L. A. said

    Boris.
    Try to calm yourself.
    Although you may not agree with the Moderators rules you shall nevertheless follow them, or risk expulsion from the site. Do you want this?
    Their website, their rules. That is just the way it is.
    Perhaps you should……take a break for a few days, or something.

    To try and expand on Boris’s post#248, the second Law of Thermodynamics also refers to a closed system. Bob, how is a universe as vast as the one you exist in[I don’t mean the theological one this time], that is thought of as expanding[even though it has no known boundries, only hypothetical ones[Now THAT’S REALLY VAST! Can you imagine?] qualify as a closed system by any definition of the word?
    And what’s wrong with Wikipedia? Besides, you can get the same information from other sites too.

  274. Boris said

    FLA,
    I am very calm. I happen to agree with the moderator’s rules just not the way they are enforced. The moderator tries to be fair but cannot really do this because of the inbred cultural prejudices that the Christian religion causes. Therefore when Bob Griffin or some other person speaks offensively the moderator does not recognize it as such. This is only natural. If I get a bit out of line that is easily seen as offensive because it is disagreeable to the cultural prejudices of Christianity.

  275. Maz said

    I guess, seeing that this is a CHRISTIAN web site, debating about CHRISTIAN issues versus other beliefs etc., they have a right to have rules and use them as they see fit. If you’re in the game, you go by the rules.

  276. F. L. A. said

    Quite right Maz[HEY, I actually agreed with you on something.That’s worth something, Ehhhhh? I’m going to go and mark this moment upon John’s calender[huge sharp-toothed grin].]
    Also Boris, as one cannot actually hear ones voice or see ones facial expressions[What a relief! Nevermind, it’s an inside joke.] it is most difficult for anyone to properly gauge to passion or lack of that goes along with these posts.People who disagree with one another just seem to automatically assume another’s hostility.Something that one must bear in mind when posting.
    For example, I used to make all of my posts in CAPITAL LETTERS because I am large, powerful, and scary looking, and I thought it fit my physical form.I called it quits because everyone thought that I was yelling everything[Which is ironic, considering that I have no real voice and cannot even speak].

  277. Maz said

    F.L.A: You are so amusing sometimes, a breathe of fresh air in the ‘hot house’ of debate!
    Well, will have to leave you until tomorrow! See y’all! 🙂

  278. Boris said

    You don’t have to see someone’s facial expressions or hear their voice to know when they aren’t telling the truth. When I see a lie posted on this blog I call it such and ask for some proof. I’m ignored and then a day or two later the same lie is posted by the same person all over again. This is the fundamentalist game and I’m very used to it. They fire off questions get their answers and then ask the same dumb questions over and over again too.

    Lying is immoral and in light of supposed Christian ethics the tactics of the fundamentalists have only convinced the rest of us that religious people can never be trusted or believed. But then they never could be.

  279. F. L. A. said

    Bob, in regards to post#21 concerning my morals, as mentioned earlier, I was once an entirely evil entity before my relationship with John. As I grew in power and intelligence and became more complicated in form Johns personal morals and ethics…”rubbed off” on me in time[There’s more to this story but I’m going to keep things very simple.].At some point, I apparently grew a conscience. I began to care about people, feelings, and things.And this was something that had never happened before.I became confused and conflicted with myself.Above all else I have to be honest and true to myself.I cannot survive without killing for food, but I could at least change from an indesriminate killer to a desciminate [yes I know those words are misspelled, I just do not care.] killer and, should I feel it worthy, be more humane in my killing. I do the best that I can, usually[snicker].
    So…..perhaps you should be asking where John gets HIS morals and ethics from, Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? He might say something similar to you in the sense that he gets them “from God” abet a different God. He never made claims of being a “good” person, you know. He has mentioned his commandments in the past, yet nobody was ever curious enough to ask him what they were. They might have made some things a little more clear. In the wilderness out here, the difference between “good” and “evil” is not always so cut and dry as someone like you might wish it to be.

  280. Boris – You miss the point. We don’t ask for much. Just respect within your comments. Your reference to inbred cultural prejudices crosses the line for the last time. Shame that you couldn’t contain yourself. We all enjoyed reading your comments. But, we can’t just keep over-looking these obviously strategically placed insults.

    Now you must go. You did this to yourself. It has nothing to do with us Christians controlling this forum, as our friends John and F.L.A. can attest to.

    Good-bye, Boris.

    Moderator (nope…not Stu)

  281. Fearless said

    Are you kidding me? I’m not insinuating that anyone is inbred on this thread as in that their parents are related by blood. That would be very prejudiced of me to slam someone whose parents were related. It’s not their fault anyway. These people are the butt of awful comments that I don’t condone one bit.

    I’m talking about intolerance and cultural prejudice being INGRAINED (is a better choice of words obviously) in religion so deeply that it is a natural offshoot. I’m saying that this cultural prejudice clouds people’s judgments. This isn’t some new argument here. Unbelievers have been making this claim as long as there has been religion.

  282. Fearless – Your point is well taken. But, we’ve had about all we can handle.

    Moderator (not Stu)

  283. Fearless said

    You need to ban Bob Griffin too then

  284. Tripp said

    You know, at some point there was an actual debate that was taking place here. Where were you during that, Fearless? Why should Bob be banned? He expresses his opinion. The problem with Boris is that he expressed his opinion, but also included defammatory insults. Guess Truth Talk Live got sick of it. He was warned many times.

    Moderator – Can you please direct us back to the debate at hand?

  285. Bob Griffin said

    Boris,

    We had a death in the family and vacation coming up Saturday, so I will be infrequent for a while. Just wanted to explain to you my style. When I play hoops, if someone elbows me, I do the same. So I was mimicking your style and being smart and smarmy. You really didnt like a taste of your own medicine, did you? I would love to keep up the debate if you could keep it civil, but that looks impossible. Keep reading and I will tell you why Flew changed his mind when I finish the book.

  286. Maz said

    With some very clear examples of the character of some people that don’t follow God, I am thankful that I do.
    He leads me on the right path, and shows me how to treat my fellow man (and woman), whether they disagree with me or not.
    Because Bob disagreed with you Fearless does not make him a liar. He just sees things from a different perspective. And you only got what you dished out. It is hard to try to not react to people like this.
    Let us return to the question at hand.

  287. Tripp said

    I’ll post this on the other thread that Kenny, the atheist, posted his hate on, but here’s my assessment.

    The atheist is obviously full of hate and seeks only to hurt the Christian.

    The Christian, while not flawless by any stretch of the imagination, is not full of hate and seeks only to help the atheist.

    Kenny and Boris have proven this to be true.

  288. Maz said

    Tripp: I think we ought to recognise that there maybe SOME atheists that aren’t like the ones we’ve had on here.

  289. F. L. A. said

    That is only fair Maz.
    Chris C. is not like that. One can find rotten people in almost everything almost everywhere. It seems to be those people[with conflicting views] with some kind of an agenda that go out of their way to seek out those who are opposites and argue and attack..eh,..”debate”, that one must be on one’s guard for, as their motives may be questionable. But you can also use these individuals to learn from and hone your communication skills and temperance on.
    If you can.

  290. Maz said

    Very true Ferox.

  291. Chris C. said

    Talking about me eh?

    I must admit I just didnt have the stamina for Darwin Debate 3.0. However, regrding Tripp (#287)…it is important to note that Christians do not get their morality, on the whole, from the Bible at all. They pick and chose the parts that fit their own ideas of morality. Look at Fred Phelps and Mother Theresa. Both Christians — the former an abomination to humanity and the latter a woman who gave more of herself to others than any of us ever dream of.

    Wherever our moral senses come from (I believe a combination of evolution and culture), it is certainly not the Bible.

  292. John said

    Another agreement between you and Ferox?
    OOooo, this is almost uncanny.
    I wouldn’t be surprised if somewhere in Christian Hell a snowflake has fallen[grin].

  293. Maz said

    Chris: Morality does come from the Bible, and most Christians would like to live that way but we can’t do any of it without Christ, for He alone in His humanity fulfilled and kept all the law.
    As far as us picking and choosing morality….I think this goes across the board don’t you think? Everywhere that humans exist, they want to set their own standards and moralities….and consider that Christians are still human beings, but striving to live a better way with God.

  294. Maz said

    John: I don’t know about snow in Hell…..I think it would melt before it could even form (actually it wouldn’t melt if it hadn’t formed!)…..but uncanny or not, it’s good that we can agree sometimes.

  295. F. L. A. said

    Maz, John was making a humorous reference to the saying “It’ll be a cold day in Hell when….” in regards to our agreeing on some things as we are such opposites in a multitude of ways.
    Other non-Christian non-Bible reading people and cultures have/had good morals and ethics.What are you thoughts on that, Maz?

  296. Maz said

    F.L.A: Yes, I know.
    And yes, they do. I know some really nice people, who aren’t Christians. I also have some really good and kind neighbours too who aren’t Christians. Infact I know a lady who once practiced witchcraft but has given it up yet not become a Christian (yet) altho she is close friends with Christians.

  297. ADB said

    Maz,
    If I could add something to what you had said about morality. Morality, the will of God, is spelled out in scripture, but one does not necessarily need to know scripture to know right from wrong. Think of Joseph, he knew in his heart that to dally with Potipher’s wife was evil even though the commandments had not been written yet. Anyway, just wanted to add my .02$ worth.

    Best Wishes

  298. Maz said

    ADB: No doubt Joseph was brought up with teaching about the true God from his father Jacob….he did have some personnal encounters with God.
    But God has given every man a conscience to know right and wrong…..some seem to have lost it somewhere in the darkness of this world.

  299. Chris C. said

    The following is taken from today’s edition of the Winston Salem Journal, a paper local to me. It is a guest column written by an adjunct professor of cultural anthropology (a subject near and dear to my heart) at Wake Forest University.

    “Most Americans appear to be confident that religious faith is the primary source of virtuous behavior. A majority of Christians seem to assume that, at some time in the distant past, the biblical god revealed to our ancestors just what we needed to understand to be good moral citizens. The story about the Ten Commandments and other myths in the Bible illustrate how this may have happened.

    Recent research suggests that we have been wrong, that morality can emerge and persist without religion. Evidence now points to the conclusion that early humans and prehumans were, long before religion started, predisposed to practice empathy, fairness and loyalty. In fact, these qualities are commonly found in bands of chimpanzees, and the normal behavior of very young children also reflects these attributes.

    Evolutionary psychologists propose that natural selection resulted in brains that instinctually encouraged Australopithecines and other early hominids to be concerned about the welfare of others in their group, to share resources and information with them and to be loyal members of that band.

    Such behavior would have been highly valuable. The cooperation facilitated by generalized empathy, fairness and solidarity would have greatly enhanced group survivability. Hominid bands that did not have these qualities would be less likely to survive, and so not pass on their genetic tendency to be amoral.

    The fact that empathy, fairness and loyalty are the norm in all human societies, in spite of a great deal of cultural differences, is consistent with this theory that, as a result of our evolution, human brains are hardwired to encourage moral behavior.

    Granted, not all individuals are moral, and most do not necessarily feel empathy for foreigners, treat strangers fairly or align themselves with outsiders. But they do empathize, share and identify with at least some others. A few may do this only with close relatives and friends, but most extend these moral principles to include additional members of their society, thus enhancing the ability of that population to survive hard times.

    As a child I accepted the popular assumption that being religious is what made people behave themselves. It seemed logical enough that if moral people pleased God and went to heaven and immoral people went to hell, then most of us would try to be good. But as a budding anthropologist I discovered that tribal belief in witchcraft can have a similar consequence, encouraging believers to behave themselves to avoid offending a witch who might, consequently, attack them.

    Additionally, since moral deviants are the most likely to be suspected of being witches, those who behave properly avoid suspicion and whatever punishment is deemed suitable for witches. And yet, I have never heard from any missionary that morality can come from faith in witchcraft, a far older belief than Christianity or an omnipotent god.

    The emergence of beliefs in evil spirits, witches, deified ancestors and punitive gods is not the source of morality but, likely, an outgrowth of morality. Had our early ancestors not had the benefits of innate morality, they probably would have been less likely to imagine supernatural agents who were somehow interested in human behavior.

    As an adult I have known numerous individuals who did not believe in supernatural power such as witchcraft or supernatural beings such as God, and yet they were no less inclined to be moral than are my religious friends.

    If morality comes from religion, why is it normal for chimpanzees, all tribal peoples and nonbelievers to feel empathy for others, to practice fairness, and to remain loyal to relatives and friends?

    Those who worry about the removal of public school-sponsored religious practices and doing away with sectarian prayers at meetings of county commissioners might take solace in knowing that although religion can encourage moral behavior, most of us will continue to be good citizens whether or not religion influences us.

    And looking around the world where so much cruelty is practiced in the name of religion, perhaps we will discover someday that, without religion, we can be more inclined to be empathetic with strangers and generous with foreigners and feel loyal to our fellow human beings in spite of racial and cultural differences.”

  300. Maz said

    I’m going to have to read all that tomorrow, it’s getting late (well it is here anyway) and my mind is slowing! G’night.

  301. John said

    [Oh my, am I ever stuffed.]
    Urp..Aaaahh. Siigh.
    eHEM![B.B.Q. sauce and pork grease-covered smile]That was a really good post Chris C. I especially like the part…” If morality comes from religion, why is it normal for all chimpanzees, tribal peoples and non-believers to feel empathy for others, to practice fairness, and to remain loyal to relatives and friends?”.
    It is good to hear from you again, for we[at least me and Ferox]have missed you in your absence.How have your academics been coming along? We assumed that this had something to do with your absence.

    “But God has given every man a conscience to know right from wrong..”.
    Be that as it may be Maz, even a pet dog[a “good” breed, like a Labrador or a Collie, not one of those yappy little spoiled brat dogs]can learn and know right from wrong, feel guilty about sins committed, and display faithfulness and loyalty to put many a man or woman to shame.

  302. Chris C. said

    Thanks for wondering, but Im not yet back in school for the fall. I’ve just been busy with work and, as I said, didn’t feel I had anything interesting to contribute to this latest Darwin thread. Maz, Bob, and I have had our say…I was letting other people pipe in. Unfortunatly, as pointed out, some weren’t so kind in their tone or words…

  303. It surely is refreshing to get on here to read the latest comments that have been posted and see that we have a couple of Christians, an Atheist, a Wiccan AND a Monster on here debating in a kind and respectful manner. I’m getting all misty…

    Moderator

  304. ADB said

    Regarding morality, I would agree with Chris that one can be perfectly “moral” without ever darkening the doors of a church or synagogue. He would disagree with my reason for holding that position I’m sure. As a Christian, I believe that our morals come from the fact that all humanity was created in the divine image. Granted the fall marred that image, but we are still created in God’s image. Like I mentioned before, the OT Law such as the 10 commandments do express God’s will in written form. The kernel of truth that all have is what enables Paul to hold Gentiles as well as Jews guilty before God in the first couple of chapters of Romans. Happy debating- universe 6,000 years old or several billion- y’all figure it out!

  305. Maz said

    Chris: Animals have feelings but they do not have a conscience like we do. They have natural instincts built in, elephants for example will look after the young of a herd….same as other animal groups, but there are some in the animal kingdom that will kill their young and not take a second thought to it.
    As ADB said, we (mankind) were created in Gods image, animals were not.

  306. Maz said

    Moderator: You must get to read some really awful posts that come your way, ones that never would see the light of day on here, how do you cope with them?
    It’s a real nice feeling when you can debate respectfully……even friendly, with a sprinkling of humour thrown in.

  307. That would be a great big “YES.” We get some unbelievable junk. I just immediately block their IP address. Takes 2 seconds.

    Moderator

  308. John said

    Maz, not all deities are in the image of “MAN”.
    And if one had the view of DEITY being a form of pure cosmic energy, or as encompassing all things[As in the view of Pantheism perhaps] then who is to say that dogs, dolphins, and other non-human lifeforms could not also have a conscience or[Dare I say it? Dare! Dare!] even a soul? Humanity has a tendency to form the Gods in his own image more often than not.
    I have known of humans that were just as quick to kill their children and not take a second thought to doing the grim deed.
    It depends on ones motivation and state of mind.Often times the “lower animals” motivation appears more “logical”, and the meat is almost always unwasted.

  309. Maz said

    John: I said we were made in the image of God. Egyptian gods certainly looked liked a mixture of man and animal.

    There are those who believe ‘god’ is in everything….even a tree.

    Cosmic forces….”The Force is with you”. Watched the film.

    There are people all over the world that believe in unbelievable things….UFO’s for instance, but there is only one truth, and the God of the Bible has proved Himself to me beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    Yes, you could also say that some people act like animals, but that could be offensive to the animal, if it were atall possible for an animal to be offended.

  310. F.L.A. said

    Siiiiiiiighhhhhh….
    Sometimes you almost come close to….giving me a headache, Maz.

  311. John said

    But what exactly IS the image of your God? Back when I was a Christian[this was waaaaaaay baaaaaaaack, mind you. I also believed in evolution at the same time, aside from using magick, so I guess I was one of those “bad Christian wanna bee’s” type of Christians.I guess I was just kidding myself at the time, eh? Anyway…] I liked the idea of God being a formless entity of pure, cosmic, creative and destructive energy. This tied in with my views of theistic evolution very well, as I figured at the time that “Made in the image of God” could have been a very simple explanation for that very first spark of creative power that gave rise to life on this planet, which in turn over eons became the diversity of lifeforms that we know of today[which goes back to that blasphemous idea of pantheism[smile]].

  312. Tripp said

    Maz – With all due respect…Ferox’s post #310 made me laugh out loud!

  313. F. L. A. said

    Bringing more joy and light into the world, that’s me…

  314. Maz said

    John: If we are made in the image of God, and Jesus was the revelation of God in human form, then that is what God is like. God walked this earth in His Son Jesus….He told Philip…”when you see me you see the Father also”, God the Father was in Jesus the Son.
    But God is also Spirit, a Person of pure Spirit, Who revealed Himself in the form of His Son…the same physical form He gave us. We are triune in nature, just as God is triune in nature. God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We are soul, body and spirit.

    How did you become a Christian originally?

  315. Maz said

    Tripp: She makes me laugh too sometimes! 🙂

  316. John said

    How did I become a Christian originally?
    Well, to judge from many of the posts that I’ve read on numerous sites here, I guess I never really was.
    This was way back when I was a little boy.I went to churches and prayed to the Christian God with the others, but I was not as the others were as far as my faith was concerned.I still even then had a polytheistic view of deities, thinking often of the Greek Deities and how they were always competing against each other while they meddled in the affairs of mankind.The Christian God was just one of my favorite Gods at that time in my life, one of my “Patron Gods”. As I grew older and wiser in the ways of magick and my understanding in Christianity I realized that our relationship was just too incompatible to be beneficial for either party. Now, you may be wondering “Why didn’t you just stop being a Witch and then be the Christian that you were supposed to be?”
    Well, obviously I was SUPPOSED to be a Witch!
    A crocodile can swim and play with river otters, but he’d still be a crocodile, no matter how much he might act like and hang out with otters.
    I have to be to be true to myself and be what I am.
    I may be mistaken but I believe that Chris C. had a rather similar story involving childhood Christianity.[?]
    Christianity, despite it’s many variations is not for everyone.

  317. Chris C. said

    I am a former Christian as well. Although I have to say I really believed all the religious stuff that went along with it. It wasn’t like I just played along for someone else’s satisfaction. I bought into it, agreed with it, even taught lessons to other members of my church body, etc.

    It took me a while to wake up, so to speak.

  318. F. L. A. said

    Perhaps you would say that…John decided to follow another dream, Chris C.?

  319. Maz said

    Testing testing 1-2-3.

  320. Maz said

    Ah! I’m through atlast! I havn’t been able to post since yesterday.

    John: #316. Here is the Christian message: (notice John….#316…John 3 v 16…isn’t that weird?). Anyway…the message:
    We are all born dead in our sins, dead spiritual to God.
    We have all inherited a sinful nature from Adam because of his sin and the curse.
    Christ came to redeem us from the curse of the law and from our sin by dying in our place on the cross and bearing our sin and our punishment.
    Then He rose again to life, conquering death for us.
    We must die to self, to this old sinful nature by accepting and believing in what Christ did for us on the cross.
    We must be born-again to a new life, becoming a new creature in Christ.
    This is what we are supposed to be.
    God intends you to be His child and for Him to be your Father.

    Christianity………Christ…IS for everyone.

  321. F. L. A. said

    The river otter makes a passionate plea to the crocodile.

  322. John said

    And the crocodile is satisfied with being a crocodile.

    I am familiar with those Bible verses, but thank you for supplying them anyway. Had I not been then they wuold have been most helpful .
    Maz, your theology has nothing to offer me that I cannot get already out of my own theology. Need I remind you that as there is no concept of Original Sin, humanity being born damned with a sinful nature[for us it’s the opposite, being born “originally blessed”.We have to actually make ourselves sinful.], or fear of death within my theology there is no need for a messiah figure, no need for mandamus mandatory spiritual redemption required due to crimes committed by [VERY!]ancient ancestors. I have been over this before with others Maz. If you like we can go back to the “Understanding the world of Wicca and more” site listed under “Apologetics” and discuss this in greater depth.

    Chris C. I wouldn’t describe my person theological experience as a “waking up” as so much as a “coming home”.

  323. Maz said

    John: ”Maz, your theology has nothing to offer me that I cannot get already out of my own theology.”
    Your wrong. You need Jesus. They can’t offer you a Savior like Him.

    ”We have to actually make ourselves sinful.”
    Wrong again. Would your mother agree that you were perfect when you were a child?

    I know your theology will not accept mine, but Jesus is not a religion, He is not a theology, He is not a ‘faith’, He is a Real Live Resurrected Person, the Son of God, Son of Man, Creator and Savior of the world. I know you don’t believe any of this so going into depth on the ‘Wicca’ site will not open your eyes any wider, and I don’t know enough about Wicca to argue the toss, (and I don’t need to know about it to know Jesus is the Only Way) only God can open blind eyes, and I pray that He will do that for you one day soon. Meanwhile the debate goes on.

  324. Maz said

    F.L.A: God is in the business of changing crocodiles into otters (and not by evolution!) He’s done it before, and He will do it again. Is anything too hard for God? Absolutely not!

  325. F. L. A. said

    And spiders into butterflies and gar fish into goldfish[huge sharp-toothed grin]?
    If you understood more about his theology you would realize that within it, there is absolutely no need FOR a savior figure.
    Do you remember when John offered you that informative site titled “How to share the Gospel with Pagans.” by Gwydion Oak? You never read that, did you?

  326. Maz said

    F.L.A: I understand the fact that Johns theology doesn’t see the need for a savior, but he need sone all the same.
    No I didn’t read it.

  327. John said

    Why would a crocodile want to be an otter?[They let us out early due to the rain, which stinks financially, but allows me to respond sooner before going home to dry out.]
    Well why didn’t you read it? It may have helped you with the presentation of your divine sales pitch.
    I said “being born originally blessed”, not being born originally perfect and being perfect as a child. Perfection is a relative ideal based on the judgments of individuals at a given time and situation, always subject to change. However, I did still ask my mother [for you]a moment ago after reading your question.”Mom, was I a perfect child?”[dreading the multitude of possible answers] and she said “No. But you were cute. You looked like a little BullFrog.” I said “A BullFrog? Hmmmmm[could be worse]. As a baby, wouldn’t I have at least been like a BIG BullFrog? Why a BullFrog? You’re always telling me I look like a monkey…”
    She says “Well, you weren’t as hairy then. It’s because you had such big feet.”
    Siiiighhh…

  328. Maz said

    John: ”I said “being born originally blessed”, not being born originally perfect and being perfect as a child.”
    But you also said, ”We have to actually make ourselves sinful.”
    Which means you are saying you were sinless when you were born…in other words…perfect.

    I had to laugh at your conversation with your mum, makes the day brighter with a little humour.

    You may prefer being an otter if you gave it a chance. But you have to take the plunge so to speak. 8)

  329. F. L. A. said

    If you equate the view of being born sinless with the idea of one being born “perfect” then yes, that is what he meant. There’s no such thing as “Original Sin” in his theology, remember?

  330. Maz said

    F.L.A: So is there anyone John knows that actually didn’t make themselves sinful? (In his theology). Or have you no choice?

  331. F. L. A. said

    That is a question that he shall have to answer, although you both probably have different ideas of what constitutes as being sinful.
    No choice? No choice in what? Being sinful?

  332. Maz said

    F.L.A: If in Johns theology he was born ‘sinless’ and had to make himself sinful….did he have a choice in doing so? Or could he have remained in that ‘sinless’ state that he was born in? You peobably know that we believe only one man lived a sinless life on this earth, and that was Jesus Christ.

  333. John said

    Wait for his answer to get it right.

  334. F. L. A. said

    That post came from me, of course.

  335. John said

    Maz, of course I had a choice in doing so, in making myself sinful.Free Will, you know. Of course there’s always chances at redemption, at least to a point[depending on the degree of sinful behavior committed].
    Yeah, my mom’s the greatest.I take her out to lunch every Friday and cook dinner for them often.

  336. Max said

    John: And what ‘chances of redemption’ have you got? Can you save yourself from your sinful nature? How? And what happens if you don’t? What about after you die?

  337. Maz said

    Why my name keeps changing to Max is a mystery…but that was my last post.

  338. F. L. A. said

    Sloppy typing? The z is right beside the x on our keyboard.
    Maz, for an answer to post#336 go to Apologetics, “Understanding the world of Wicca and more.” and read posts #4 and #6[specifically].

  339. Maz said

    F.L.A: It’s nothing to do with me my name is permanently in the box under ”Leave a Reply” as Maz, it seems to change by itself for some reason.

    I’ll look those posts up.

  340. Maz said

    F.L.A: Certainly Christians believe in the law of reaping and sowing too but I find that the Wicca belief/beliefs are not as rock solid as that which is given us in the Bible. What writings if any do you possess….like we have the Bible….what do you have to go to for instruction and direction?
    I’m glad it doesn’t depend entirely on me to get anywhere or be anyone in this world or to get to Heaven after death, in fact we need Gods help to live this life and get to share eternity with Him.

  341. F. L. A. said

    Sorry that it took me so long to respond to you Maz, I was hunting things.Your first sentence within post#340 sounds odd considering that within post#323 you typed “..I don’t know enough about Wicca to argue the toss..” in regards to Christian v.s. Wiccan theology.
    Have you been recently studying on the side???
    As to what you have learned not seeming to be very “rock solid”, realize that the very same observation could be made about the Christian Commandments. For example, do you recall how skeptics and Christians within this site at various times have debated/argued/accused over the meaning of commandment#6? I can think of three interpretations. Lo Tiritzack indeed!
    I am not a Wiccan Maz. At best one might describe me as being “Wiccan-Like” in many ways, however this may also be compared to the example that a King Crab is “Spider-Like” without being a spider.
    Re-read my post#279 above for a simple understanding on ME. As mentioned within that post, John has a long list of commandments that pertain to his particular denomination of Wicca, and as I was effected by HIM, learning his commandments would also help you to understand MY stand on this issue, as I also abide by many of the same rules.

  342. Maz said

    F.L.A: It’s OK I went to bed early anyway, I was tired, and I am 5 hours infront of you over there.

    You said, ”Your first sentence within post#340 sounds odd considering that within post#323 you typed “..I don’t know enough about Wicca to argue the toss..” in regards to Christian v.s. Wiccan theology.”

    I read Johns post as you asked me to that’s why.
    I havn’t read anything else. Oh…perhaps a few notes I had in my files.

    Which of Johns Wicca commandments don’t you follow?
    And are these commandments written down somewhere? Who wrote them?
    You see I trust in the historicity of the Bible and it’s reality as the very Word of God. What do Wiccan’s have that is as trustworthy?

    Your #279 post is strange to say the least and I am trying to understand what kind of person you were to start with and what you have become now. You said in one of your earlier posts that you were confused….about what specifically?

  343. Maz said

    F.L.A: Tell a lie …..Ooooooooo! (Actually I forgot) I did look up something on the internet about Wicca aswell but I can’t really remember much of what it said and I really don’t understand it atall well.

  344. F. L. A. said

    Confused about my place within this universe, now.

  345. Maz said

    F.L.A: Are you doing anything to find this place within this Universe? Do you think it is important?

  346. F. L. A. said

    Methinks that you speak of spirituality, while I do not[Well, not SOLELY.]. I have found my place Maz, but it is still confusing. I shall not tell you very much about my past. You would not believe it anyway, and no good would come of it for you.
    I would have answered you sooner, but I had to wait for John to return from work to get his permission to re-read and print out the commandments for you. They are all in his Book Of Shadows, if you know what that is, and to even touch it without permission, even by me, is taboo.
    They are commandments #24:Always try to protect and respect untamed nature and the natural world.

    And #28:Unless you can prove otherwise, treat different religions and their deities with respect in case they are real and powerful.You never know, and besides it’s good manners.

    I do not always honor #24 because I feed off of wildlife, and as for commandment#28 I have no respect for the deities, devotees, and customs of those theological belief systems that are deemed by me as evil.

    As to your inquiry concerning the recording of his commandments and their history, you shall have to wait until he returns from the bookstores of Naples, as this is a question for him to answer. I could, but it would be better to get it from him, do you not agree?
    He’s at a Barns and Nobles.
    He won’t return for a loooong time.

  347. Maz said

    F.L.A: Thanks for that. I may not believe your past, and I wouldn’t ask you for any further revelations but what is important is your future. I hope it gets better for you.
    Will wait for John to return for him to reply to the questions about the Wicca writings.

  348. F. L. A. said

    Important to note: The writings of HIS DENOMINATION of Wicca.
    They are going extinct, you know. There are only four of them left, and John has no Heirs[So rejoice Ivy, SomeGuy, Educated Dawg, MonkeyMan, Bozo, Bob, Brad Kenneth J., Stu,etc.etc., for when they are gone you shall have one less kind of Witch in this world to fret over and debated against.].
    Maz, why did you not want to discuss this on the “Understanding the world of Wicca and more.” site? At least then we would be on topic. Notice that everyone else shut up after post#317?

  349. John said

    Yes, just the three of us…and however many millions who may be quietly reading[grin]. As to your questions within post#342, we already covered some of this waaaaaay back on the “Are You A Red-Letter Christian?” site, posts#106 and #108.
    Almost[or more likely..]all of my anscestors that came to America in the 1700’s were illiterate so almost everything was remembered and passed down orally. Long ago my Grandfather wrote them all down, a copy of which I have myself within my own Book of Shadows.
    Is this what you wanted to know about, or have I misunderstood you?

  350. Anon said

    I’ve been reading all these posts carefully and I am willing to put money on the fact that John and F.L.A. are one and the same.

  351. John said

    Yes, we have heard of and been accused of this before Anon.
    Is it because we sound alot alike? Because we both use the same computer? If this were true, then it would beg the question of which one of us is the real person, the Witch, or the Monster. Either way you look at it the final conclusion to this hypothetical scenario would probably be rather disturbing, don’t you think? There would also be the question of what the possible motivation would be for one odd character pretending to be two.
    Why in the world???
    And how said hypothetical character could be in two places at once, like me at work, etc., while Ferox posts throughout the day[not counting that one post on the evolutionary site where we tag-teamed our answers, remember that?], but then of course you really only have our word on this, of course.
    But hey, why stop there?
    Perhaps whichever one of us is the real person is also character Barney?
    Or ADB?
    Or Chris C.?
    Perhaps I decided to be a bad character and, using another computer somewhere, pretended to be Boris, but just got carried away and got myself banned?
    Perhaps I[whichever one of us I may be] was Bob Griffin, so I could make Young-Earth Christian Creationists look silly and annoy…myself as Ferox and Chris C. and John, and[this is stupid].
    Believe what you like, it changes nothing really. You are unable to prove your claim as I am unable to prove mine to you.
    I have to go to bed now.
    Goodnight.

  352. Maz said

    F.L.A: #347. To be honest I don’t really want to know about Wicca, I want to understand where John is coming from so I can answer him better.

    John: #349. Thanks for the information. As I see it the writings that you have then are in no way on the same level as the Bible which was written over several thousand years by different authors inspired by God and which harmonize completely throughout, apart from containing historical records of the descendents of our first parents Adam and Eve.
    Your writings on the other hand are only two generations old, written by your Grandfather who received them orally. Am I correct in this assumption?

    John: I would still like to know why you call Ferox ‘The monster’. To me it is demeaning, I’m wondering if she really enjoys being called that.

  353. F. L. A. said

    Maz, I appreaciate your…concern, but it is nothing to be bothered by. The title is very fitting. Just take my word for it. Being a monster is not always a negative, for me it’s like a man being called a man, while bering in mind that some men are good and some men are evil. But a man is still a man regardless, yes?
    If not a “monster”, then I know not what accurate term could be used for my description.

    “To be honest I don’t really want to know about Wicca, I want to understand were John is coming from so I can answer him better.”-Maz

    Would not one help with the other?
    I do not care what if anything you learn about his denomination of Witchcraft.

    Anon, would you be willing to bet $1,500? John needs some repairs done to his roof and he figures that is what it would cost to get the job done.

  354. Maz said

    Ferox: It does help to know about what JOHN believes, rather than Wicca in general because like Christianity there are many denominations so it would be better to get the information straight from the proverbial ‘horses mouth’. I want to know what John personally believes, so it is more helpful to ask him.

    The more you understand where a person is coming from the better you can debate them don’t you agree?

    I feel uncomfortable with calling anyone a monster unless they were like Hitler or Pol Pot or any mass murderers. I’m sure you are nothing like them.

    ”I do not care what if anything you learn about his denomination of Witchcraft.”
    That is the difference between us….that I DO care about you knowing Jesus Christ and His love for you because it is vital for your eternal destiny. Whatever you believe about yourself, God looks upon you as someone He loves and wants to save from a lost eternity.

  355. Maz said

    I guess ‘Darwin/God” is not the thread to talk about this it’s just the way it’s gone. If you think it would be better to move to the Wicca site I’m willing to do so.

  356. John said

    Maz, we are rather busy at the moment, as we are about to be creamed by a hurricane[!]. You may not hear from either of us for a few days, so this discussion shall have to be temporarily postponed until the weather settles down.
    We thank you for your patience in this matter.
    Goodnight[toothy grin].

  357. ADB said

    John, F.L.A.,

    I hope that you do not have any significant damage from the storm. I’ll look forward to hearing from you after it has passed.

    Best Wishes,
    The curmudgeonly pastor

  358. F. L. A. said

    Thank you ADB for your concern. I, we, enjoy the idea that your reading.Do you find this entertaining? I do.
    Personally I am very excited about the coming storm.I love the feel of a hurricane’s powerful rains and…o.k., so perhaps I am a little insane. Hopefully this storm will not kill anyone I care about or destroy our means of communication. If you don’t hear from us within a few months then you’ll know, eh?
    Best wishes to you too, ADB.
    Fare you well.

  359. ADB said

    John and FLA,
    These threads are sometimes enternaining to glance at occasionally. Personally, up here in upstate of SC we are in the midst of a severe drought, so as long as the storm doesn’t do any major damage or hurt anyone, I’d love to see it come ashore where it could eventually end up on top of us and give us several inches of much-needed rain.

    Best Wishes

  360. Maz said

    John and Ferox: I love the storms too, the thunder and lightening, but we don’t quite get them like you. I hope you come through it OK for another round of debate. We can continue about your beliefs in Wicca (John) on the ‘Wicca’ site when you come back to us. I would like to know about the writings you have, who wrote them and when. And the deities you speak of seem a little unstable to me.
    It’s supposed to be sunny August here but we have rain and it’s not too warm either!
    G’day.

  361. John said

    I’m bAaaaaack.
    Alright Maz, I will meet you there.

  362. Bob Griffin said

    Im baaaaack too. Got way behind from vacation. Heres a thought for some discussion. Read Antony Flews book on vacation – How the worlds most notorious atheist changed his mind. He changed his mind because of the DNA investigations. The almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life. How do 3 billion base pairs of DNA come together without a designer? And another one for Boris ( I hope youre still checking in ) Symmetry. Why is there something and not absolute nothingness? And why does what exists conform to symmetries?

  363. Maz said

    Bob: Boris has been banned so it is unfair to ask him something he can’t answer.

    I don’t think the 3 billion base pairs does it for those who believe in evolution. The absolute complexity and amazing makeup of life on earth doesn’t seem to reach their eyes or understanding. They don’t see because they won’t see.

    DNA is still the best indication of intelligent design and an Intelligent Designer, but there are those so blind that they will never see unless a miracle happens. Thank goodness, God is still in the business of miracles!

  364. Bob Griffin said

    Maz,

    I know he was banned, but I told him I would summarize the book. Just hoping he would check in and see the results.

  365. Maz said

    Ok Bob.

  366. Bob Griffin said

    Maz,

    I return to the site and everyone abandons it. Whats up with that?

  367. You actually make it seem really easy together with your
    presentation but I in finding this topic to be really something which I believe I might never understand.
    It kind of feels too complicated and very vast for me.
    I’m having a look forward for your subsequent publish, I’ll attempt to get the hang of it!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: