Angels and Theistic Evolution

[ChordatesLegacy]

Well, you have to study the Book first, before you can make such an ignorant comment.

The bible is not the word of god, it is a bad translation of a bad translation of a bad translation of non-existent scripts written by Bronze Age men whose knowledge of the natural world is less than even yours and that is saying something.

 

[paug]

Why would God even need a book, why would he decide to write a book. Who even wrote the Genesis. If it was God, why is it in the 3rd person? (excuse my use of the word person to describe Gawd.) Not really relevant questions, or "gotcha" questions, just me wondering. You can PM me with your thoughts if you like, so as not to throw the thread off-course.



Continue.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Well, you have to study the Book first, before you can make such an ignorant comment.

I've studied the book -- why don't you explain how my comment is ignorant?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Hey, not bad. You are right this time.

But, this effect is related to the cause. So the name: son of thunder is not only the son of sound wave, but son of "lightening".

That's like saying the son of my father is also the son of my grandfather.

Assuming you have a point, what is it?

 

[Herman Hedning]

Well, you have to study the Book first, before you can make such an ignorant comment.

I see, making ignorant comments is something reserved for those who have studied the bible. That sure explains most of the creationist posts around here.

 

[AV1611VET]

I see, making ignorant comments is something reserved for those who have studied the bible. That sure explains most of the creationist posts around here.

In my opinion, everyone is either a creationist, or they are ignorant and will admit it.

If anyone disagrees, take this challenge.

There is no such a thing as a non-creationist.

 

[Cabal]

In my opinion, everyone is either a creationist, or they are ignorant and will admit it.

If anyone disagrees, take this challenge.

There is no such a thing as a non-creationist.

False dichotomy much?

Also, still waiting for a reply. And what was the point of this topic, anyhoo?

 

[Belk]

In my opinion, everyone is either a creationist, or they are ignorant and will admit it.

If anyone disagrees, take this challenge.

There is no such a thing as a non-creationist.

What is the deal with you and semantics?

 

[Herman Hedning]

If anyone disagrees, take this challenge.

No, no, AV! You are supposed to say "If anyone disagrees, they can take a hike!"

Isn't that your standard reply to just about everything nowdays?

 

[MasterOfKrikkit]

Just checkin' in... and I see this absurd thread is still going.

False dichotomy much?

Play to your strengths, grasshopper.

Also, still waiting for a reply. And what was the point of this topic, anyhoo?

Careful. I aired my views on that question and look where it got me...

What is the deal with you and semantics?

As I said above, play to your strengths. Especially if they're all you have.

 

[paug]

"
My Ex-nihilo Challenge
If you do not believe in creatio ex nihilo, I challenge you to give me a coherent explanation as to how mass and/or energy first appeared."

Your idea of a "coherent explanation" scares me sh1tless. Not even the most elementary logic has been good enough for you, I don't see how anyone could please you.

The fact that science can't explain every single phenomenon doesn't grant creationism a victory by default. Science has never claimed to have an explanation for everything.

 

[mpok1519]

ex nihlo challenge = pile of [fill in the blank]