The Conservative News
HOME NEWS IMPORTANT LINKS YOUR VIEW SIGN IN REGISTER

Already Registered?
Sign In Here
Username :
Password :


HOME >> Your View
Do you think......... « Return to Topics
Yoda_Joe_blie Posted 14:32, 06/24/2010
Do you think

obama is the antichrist?

I know this may stir some discussion. Keeping it to a Yes or No would be fabulous.

Yoda_Joe_blie Posted 14:33, 06/24/2010
Yes

Big Kahuna Posted 16:17, 06/24/2010
Y_J_b I have to write more than my answer which is No. But I do believe that he is setting the stage for the coming of the antichrist.

FED UP Posted 12:41, 06/26/2010
Aw, come on, y'all. You know you believe it, let's hear you say it. Make Yadkin county and the republican party proud.
Not embarrassed, are you?

pitbull Posted 14:7, 06/26/2010
No--bush jr.

white american Posted 22:44, 06/26/2010
fu, you are a true liberal. You were stupid enough to vote obama to office. After 1 1/2 years of him ruining this nation, you are still too stupid to realize your prez in tearing this country apart. The smart people are waiting until 2012 so we can get rid of this piece of sh1t

michelekibbler Posted 23:49, 06/26/2010
Either Obama is extremely dumb, or he knows what he is doing, and is intentionally harming our country.

SBD Posted 5:10, 06/27/2010
100% he knows what he is doing because he is being told what to do--AKA no spine, character or morales.

SBD Posted 5:12, 06/27/2010
100% he knows what he is doing because he is being told what to do--AKA no spine, character or morales.

weezie Posted 19:10, 06/27/2010
You people don't get it , do you? There will be no antichrist!

Man started these teachings to rule and try to keep others in line!

dec231991 Posted 20:13, 06/27/2010
Weezie you are the one that does not get it. There will be a rapture, antichrist, tribulation and then a returning of our Lord and Savior. We are seeing the Bible fulfilled every day.

Heathenism Posted 22:59, 06/27/2010
dec231991

You have doubts about what you profess. Embrace them.

dec231991 Posted 8:27, 06/28/2010
Heathenism I do not have any doubts about what I profess. I embrace what the Bible says about the end of time and someday every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 11:53, 06/28/2010
Dec231991<---
Not everyone is able to comprehend. Not everyone is ment to understand. Gods special children are the ones Jesus will come for. You are corect. You can offer someone advice. Its up to them to take it. There willnever be a day where thay can say "I dident know".

Heathenism Posted 20:8, 06/28/2010
dec231991

You are admitting to believe what has been written in a simple book though I know you have doubts because you know this book was written by men. You have Nature outside and yet you still believe in a human creation. Why?

There is only one Nature and hundreds of books. Why choose a book?

Newday Posted 6:40, 06/29/2010
Heathenism,
Why is it so important for you to attack someones beliefs. If you truly believed yours then you would know that beliefs are central to feeling at one with your place in the universe. Maybe some of these folks are comfortable with their universe and merely wish you would leave them alone.

Heathenism Posted 8:42, 06/29/2010
Newday

By your definition this is an attack? Have you been reading anything from any Christian on this forum within the past year?

The Christian needs to leave the rest of us alone. They force themselves into politics with incredible arrogance and demand EVERYTHING be their way.

Of course this is an attack to you. Evidently you agree with some denomination of the Christian myth or you wouldn't have spouted such ignorance.

dec231991 Posted 8:59, 06/29/2010
Heathenism,
Are we forcing you to respond to our posts. You have every right to read and move on just like I do. Yes men wrote the Bible but God inspired them to write His words down. God is the only one who can draw you to him and if you choose to ignore then that is between you and God. Just because people do not agree with you does not make us ignorant. This is America and you can believe what you want because we are a free nation. God gave you a choice and if you choose to go aganist him then again that is between you and God.

Heathenism Posted 9:16, 06/29/2010
You tell me that I can believe whatever I want then you go on to explain why I'm wrong and how you're right.

Typical for the Bible Belt. Blind acceptance of the Bible's "ultimate authority." I feel I have a duty to respond to ignorance in hoping to change someone's mind.

If you've read the Bible and possessed any critical thinking skills, you'd see my point.

Newday Posted 9:29, 06/29/2010
The only point Im making with you Heath is that if it doesnt concern you then buzz off. Im not attacking you do what you want, believe what you want and keep it to yourself. Who is to say what is wrong and right. Just buzz off and Im sure youll be fine not converting someone to your way of thinking.

dec231991 Posted 9:36, 06/29/2010
I also feel I have a duty to respond to ignorance in hoping to change someone's mind and bring them in the Kingdom so they can have eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Heathenism Posted 10:5, 06/29/2010
Newday

I have to buzz off? It does concern me. You people vote.

dec231991

So, I have to believe in some mythological kingdom or suffer the wrath of some mythological creature in some mythological torture chamber. Prove it like 1 Thessalonians says.

dec231991 Posted 10:40, 06/29/2010
Heatheism just know that you can post all you want to but you will not change my mind.

Heathenism Posted 10:45, 06/29/2010
dec231991

What a waste the closed mind is. Choosing a book over absolute truth. Blasphemous.

Newday Posted 13:35, 06/29/2010
No what you dont understand is it doesnt matter. What works for you doesnt necessarily work for someone else so dont try and sell them on it. Let them be happy. Honestly it sounds as if you are trying to convince yourself and you really dont know where you stand or can get anyone to go along with your version. Is it necessary that someone agree with you for you to be happy? Thats why I said leave these folks and their beliefs alone just relish yours and be proud youre the smartest man in the universe. It would make us happy and you happy. Dont worry be happy.

Heathenism Posted 13:48, 06/29/2010
Is it necessary that ever Christian bring Christianity and their beloved Jesus into EVERYTHING? Yes, they have to. It's what their Bible says. You people sitting in the Jesus camp have no problem with this. To others, it's irritating. Just look a the name of this thread. Oh its the coming of the end oh my! Why didn't you guys say this about Dubya?

I'm only fertilizing your seeds of doubt.

Newday Posted 14:50, 06/29/2010
Whats coming from you is definitely fertile, very fertile. Honestly it irritates me but thats the world we live in. It takes all kinds even heathens. So do you think Obama is the antichrist?

Heathenism Posted 14:57, 06/29/2010
Since I do not believe Jesus Christ to have been anything other than an ordinary man if he existed at all, I cannot call something "Antichrist."

I do not think Obama is the best nor the worst so far. He clearly isn't a Libertarian and I don't believe he is a Socialist. He has been called a Corporatist by someone I admire which I think most accurately describes him.

Heathenism Posted 14:58, 06/29/2010
Thomas Jefferson was a heathen.

Newday Posted 18:5, 06/29/2010
Heathen,
I think you like the term heathen because you know it gets under some folks skin but that really doesnt matter to me. More folks than not think along the same lines you do but they dont call themselves heathen. So please enlighten me about Thomas Jefferson and his heathenism I would actually like to know. Your view on Obama is refreshing he is definitely different from the usual crop of crap we get offered up in the form of presidents. I wont go into the details but corporatist sounds pretty accurate to me as well.

Heathenism Posted 19:26, 06/29/2010
Newday

He hacked up the Old Testament. The Jefferson Bible. Amazon has it.

Newday Posted 19:33, 06/29/2010
I will have to look that up and read about what he did to it. Ask yourself this? What would be the difference between what he did and a group of Catholic priests who canonized what books we were actually allowed to be exposed to, or not?
So how much of heathen is he really. Maybe he was just a great condenser!! I think he liked black women slaves and actually there is lineage that supports that.

Heathenism Posted 19:44, 06/29/2010
Newday

The difference is that those books the Catholics allowed "in," are the "inerrant WORD OF GOD." Jefferson didn't claim his version was the "word."

Newday Posted 21:12, 06/29/2010
Have you read it by chance? Im going to look it up right now.

Newday Posted 21:28, 06/29/2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible

I found the description of what was done very enlightening and progressively minded in the way that Jefferson was trying to dissect and separate one thing only and that was the words and teachings of Jesus himself. He didnt no claim that his dissection of the New Testament was anything other than an interpretation he sought out for himself and this proves that he is both a scholary individual with a sincere longing. As for his cutting out of the pages of the Bible---It is a book and that was the easiest way for Jefferson to separate and catalog a work of that extent at that time. The bible is made of paper and binder and for all intense purposes is destructible. Perhaps you prefer to view what he did as Heathenistic but what I view it as is an attempt to achieve a higher understanding of a great man whether he be given to us by deity or birth be it virgin or not. It does not matter. No single work Jefferson has done can undo an entire lifetime of above average service to our nation and an obvious admiration for ones belief in the teachings of a man named Jesus whom he obviously adored enough to study to this depth. Heathen not in my opinion.

Heathenism Posted 22:28, 06/29/2010
Newday

The belief among Christians is that Jesus is the son of god and Jesus himself a god. Correct? What characteristics separate Jesus from other men? Didn't Jefferson, in his book, take away everything Jesus had in regards to divinity?

The very foundation of Christianity is a belief in the supernatural. Jefferson took this away. Not heathenism?

And no, I haven't read it. I've only read about it and am aware of Jefferson's disdain for the supernatural.

Heathenism Posted 22:32, 06/29/2010
Interesting.....

http://www.monticello.org/reports/interests/religion.html

Newday Posted 6:1, 06/30/2010
Jefferson believed in the existence of a Supreme Being who was the creator and sustainer of the universe and the ultimate ground of being, but this was not the triune deity of orthodox Christianity. He also rejected the idea of the divinity of Christ, but as he writes to William Short on October 31, 1819, he was convinced that the fragmentary teachings of Jesus constituted the "outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man." In correspondence, he sometimes expressed confidence that the whole country would be Unitarian, but he recognized the novelty of his own religious beliefs. On June 25, 1819, he wrote to Ezra Stiles, "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."

--Rebecca Bowman, Monticello Research Department, August 1997
-----------------------------------------------
I really dont know what a heathen is but if searching for the answers within this framework is heathenism then lets call it that buy from my standpoint I think a more accurate term is agnostic---which means still searching. Thankyou for the link definitely interesting stuff. In fact I think you might be more agnostic than atheist and thusly a little less heathen.

Heathenism Posted 8:59, 06/30/2010
Newday

The only correct answer is that we don't know though I lean towards some type of intelligence so I consider myself to be a Deist. The heathen is someone who simply rejects the god of the Bible. That's it.

Newday Posted 10:3, 06/30/2010
Im not prepared to reject what is obviously way beyond my ability to find out information about.
------------------------------------------------So whether or not there a God and that is his name is surely debateable except for his name appears all through the Bible and we have to have something to call him therefore he has become to be known as God.
--------------------------------------------------
Now Jesus on the other hand was a great man regardless of his origin. He is one man who changed the world or his part of it and I have to give him credit for his teachings as he taught by example even until horrible death.
--------------------------------------------------
Man created multiple religious movements and made up the rules and regulations for all of that mostly to benefit something they wanted done or something they wanted to be able to do or to get. tThey did so in the name of the deity they worshipped. So I think less of the thousands of religious movements and infinitely more of the ideas of great men.
--------------------------------------------------
So put me down a deeply religious, still searching and open to new information as it is discovered in the desert from time to time.

Put me down as tolerant of other people religions and beliefs but pardon me if I dont seem as interested in their version of things even when they say their way is the only right way. I didnt say I would listen or care just know I support your right to do so. Ive enjoyed our conversation. Thankyou.

Newday Posted 10:5, 06/30/2010
I do not think Obama is the Anti-Christ!!

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 13:20, 06/30/2010
Simple yes or no would of sufficed. So I see there is another issue. Hethan you are correct. We christion are supposed to live it in everything we do. It's not just for 1 day out of the week. Everyday everything everywhere. So you are more than welcome to say what you want. I may disagree with you. You have that right.

We are obligated to try with love and trueth to sway you. Not an attack, more a concern about your soul. God gave you free will. You have the right to try to sway us.
What is your reson to sway us?

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 13:22, 06/30/2010
Simple yes or no would of sufficed. So I see there is another issue. Hethan you are correct. We christion are supposed to live it in everything we do. It's not just for 1 day out of the week. Everyday everything everywhere. So you are more than welcome to say what you want. I may disagree with you. You have that right.

We are obligated to try with love and trueth to sway you. Not an attack, more a concern about your soul. God gave you free will. You have the right to try to sway us.
What is your reson to sway us?

Heathenism Posted 14:27, 06/30/2010
Yoda

The Christian makes extraordinary claims. These claims deserve extraordinary evidence. I've seen none. Too much blood has been spilled in the name of the god of the Bible for which there is not a single shred of evidence.

I like what Thomas Paine said:

It goes something like this....

Belief in a cruel god makes a cruel man.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 12:9, 07/01/2010
So what you are saying is. You want to sway my opinion because there is no proof of claimes and my god is cruel.

Ok the claimes are big. God creating everything. No proof thow? Not a shred of evidence? If you can't see the evidence or do not beleave what there is. There is nothing I can say to change that. You seem informed so you know what there is for proof. You don't think it's real or whatever. Don't matter.

Now for the killing part. Heck ya God has told the isreal people in the old book to kill every thing in this or that place. There are instances of great wars God ordered. You are correct. If you don't know I'm in the Christion Identity movement. It explains why god did alot of things. In the old book. So about thows wars and blood shed I fully agree and support.
Now if your talking about the inquisition that was man made. Not divinely ordered. Mistranslations and bastardized scripture. Not God.
Today's bloodshed? Not meanny fallow the Word anymore. Most churches don't even teach it. There are lots of religions out there. Don't lump Christions in with muslim. There is a diferance. Or hindews or jews for that matter.

So you must be talking about the death and destruction of the old book. Gods people of The Adam. Wouldn't you protect your children? Would you allow them to perish? What kind of father would you be if you didn't try at least to keep evil away. Back in the day keeping evil away involved killing it so it won't reproduce more evil. Unfortanatly we didn't listen to God some times and we have evil in the world. In my opinion evil has no right to live.

So your question is going to be. What if you think I'm evil. Do I deserve to die?
I don't judge you. If your a child of Adam. I would hope and try to change your mind. If your not. The day is comeing. The end of this age is just around the corner.

Newday Posted 12:21, 07/01/2010
"Shop now, everything ends in 2012"

Heathenism Posted 13:7, 07/01/2010
No shred of evidence for the god of the Bible or Jesus either. Some may agree that nature itself is evidence for a higher intelligence but this is no evidence for the "higher intelligence" in the Bible. The god of the Bible has characteristics of humans. Why do you think that is? Perhaps because this god is a product of human imagination?

As for the god of the Bible being cruel. Think of omniscience. Understand?

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 11:18, 07/02/2010
As I stated before. You are blind. I will not descus that matter. Short of God himself coming down and performing miricals for you. There is no use to try. No matter what I say the answer from you will me no. Your question is simple to answer about the why God is like us. Allso shows your blindness.

The answer is. We are like God not him like us. Created in his imadge mean anything to you? Yes we look like our father.

So now again on the cruel aspect. How can the omni answer anything. Are you saying syncs he is omni he created us to be cruel to us and satisfy his need for cruelty?

I can't see or understand that last bit. Please enlighten me.
O btw if you do suggest that. I have you answer. It's as simple as my answer about your blindness.

hms1 Posted 13:18, 07/02/2010
OH let me tell you I really feel sorry for these people that say the nothing about the Bible is real. Where did all the people in these World come from? God made us all. I do agree that Obama is not a president he just likes being called that. Why could he not handle Health Care can the Gov. take better care of it than him. Where was he at when we had the Oil spill? I saw him on the golf course just grinning and was acting so happy.

BlizzardAge Posted 15:44, 07/02/2010
LOL! The very idea of the "anti-Christ" is hilarious, but Obama being labeled as such is even more humorous. I also hear Laura Bush is Mother Goose, and Al Gore is Captain Planet.

idontno Posted 16:21, 07/02/2010
No he's not because i want be here when the anti-christ comes.Blizz you don't need to comment on that statement but i know you will.

Heathenism Posted 19:40, 07/02/2010
Yoda

You're calling me blind yet you are the one who can't see through the Christian myth? Are you afraid? You know what is said about fear don't you?

A god who has created sentient beings knows that these beings will, as the Babble says, "fall." He knows he will have to send some of these beings to an eternity of torture. This is the very definition of cruelty.

Heathenism Posted 19:42, 07/02/2010
hms1

Wow! Do you mean that all I have to do is read the Bible and all my questions will be answered?

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 20:25, 07/02/2010
Heathenism<--
No sir not at all. As a rehabilitated liberal I know the other side of Christianity. I see clearly. Everything in The Bible, Old and New, is confermed in other cultures written history. Peaple who had no interest or knew about The Bible. I have no fear in looking in to the heart of science and seeing nothing other than Gods works. I have no idea what you say about fear btw.

You are looking at it the wrong way. You look at it thrue human eyes. As you say Sentient beings. You cant see it from Gods point of view and why should you. Like I sead blind. Not only with dis-belefe but with hatered.

God did create sentient beings. He dident creat robots. I dont know but if you have kids. You know they will fall. You help them. You advise them. You lead them. As a Father thats your job to look after your children. We are Gods children. We dont listen to everything he ses. We dont fallow his rules. Thay are simple rules to live by. As any parent knows.

We are his children. If you call God cruel makeing Children and not robots. Then you should call every and all fathers and mothers Cruel for haveing children.

Like I sead simple answer. We are the children of God. He gave us the ability to think and imagin. He gave us free will to deside what we want to do with what he gave us.

Now if you still think giveing some one freedom is cruel. Thats another issue not involving God.

Heathenism Posted 21:32, 07/02/2010
Yoda

You have no fear looking into the heart of science yet you look to a cobbled together book full of contradictions for absolute truth? A book written by men, put together by men, misquoted by men, misunderstood by men, and misused by again, men, for no other purpose but their own.

I'm not seeing it through god's eyes but yet again, you rely on men to translate to you what god thinks, see, and wants? And how do you suppose we humans can see anything through the eyes of the creator of the universe?

Simple rules? Old Testament rules are simple? And don't tell me that we're not under the old covenant anymore because I'll ask you why god, your omniscient god, changed his mind.

I think you need to rethink your comparison. How can you possibly put a human's relationship with its offspring in the same basket as a god's relationship with its creation?

Free will? But if we don't believe in his book we'll go to hell? Does this god deserve worship? Do you actually think the being who has given us the ability to use logic and reason, wants us to believe what has been written in some crusty old book when we can clearly see the flaws within in?

Confirmed with other culture's history? Really? I smell something......

Fear. The lowest of human emotion has been used by men to control other men. You FEAR that if you don't believe and execute a "christlike" earthly existence, you'll go to hell. At the core of every Christian is their want for their own salvation hence their "desire" to do good. This is all in vain and in fear and selfishness.

BlizzardAge Posted 1:17, 07/03/2010
Yoda:

If everything in the Bible has been corroborated by other cultures, why doesn't any other culture mention the sun standing still as the Bible says in Joshua 10:13 (which means the Earth stopped rotating on its axis)? What about the sun going black when Jesus allegedly died on the cross? These are events in the Bible that would have been witnessed all over the world yet no other culture reports such spectacular events. That's not even to mention the utter ridiculousness of something like that occurring anyway, requiring laws of nature to be broken. Just be honest with yourself. These stories are not literally true.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 12:29, 07/03/2010
Bliz<--- What's the date of the first question. Second one the same. Could it of bin a localized event? He is God you know.

Heathen<---
I'll go over you remarks paragraph at a time.
Devinely inspired and written by men. In Hebrew exactingly copied by men to a acuracie of true today with the dead sea scrolls in word for word transcription. There where rules set down for the scribes. There was no to very little errors in the transcription so proven by the dead sea scrolls. Yes it was later interpreted by man with agendas to other languages from it's original Hebrew. Yes man did alter it for there selfish wants. Was this man of Adam? Was this man a child of cane? Canes children have a large role in that matter. Can it be trusted? yip the Hebrew can be trusted.

Seeing thrue Gods eyes may have bin misunderstood and defenetly not saying it in that way. God says we are his children. So he is our father. He gives us laws. We have free will. His angles have free will. They even disobayed and rebelled. He protected his children. He suffered for us and clensed us our sins. From theas facts you can deduce some things.

He never changed his mind. The old and new are one book. I read the hole Bible as one book. What they teach in today's churches is a travesty. The Law was never abolished. Adam was not the first man. Noah's flood was not world wide. Some of the major things that destroy peaples beleaf in God.


Why can't you?


What flaws?

Yes confirm. I'll have to read back to get the exacting quotes and cultures of the storys. Jesus going to England between his 12-30 th years, where the localized flood of Noah was, where cane's city was. Really neat stuff btw.

Fear is used by man to Controle man. I see no fear in my religion. Just a fathers love. I as you I'm sure fear nothing of hell. Peaple who beleave don't beleave to prevent hell. Fallowing not to go to hell is wrong and won't change a things. I fallow God's laws not just for salvation. I love my father. I want to make him proud of his children.

BlizzardAge Posted 13:59, 07/03/2010
Yoda:

The sun standing still would be a localized event? Do you understand what the hell you're talking about. This whole "he's God you know" is so ridiculous. That's precisely why I'm saying you're foolish. You've got the skepticism towards your particular God that a three-year old does towards Santa Clause.

You'll have to google if you want specific dates. I'm not sure the Bible mentions any. The important feature you seem to have missed is there's not a chance in hell those two things actually happened.

BlizzardAge Posted 14:11, 07/03/2010
Yoda:

"He never changed his mind. The old and new are one book. I read the hole Bible as one book. What they teach in today's churches is a travesty. The Law was never abolished."

He most certainly did change his mind. In the old testament Yahweh required his worshipers to follow a bunch of rules. He got rid of that with Jesus in the New Testament. At some point this "perfect" Yahweh decided he'd gotten it wrong in thinking human being could follow those rules, so he sent his little boy down to be slaughtered as a disgusting scapegoat for the sins of the world. It's a major change.

"Adam was not the first man. Noah's flood was not world wide. Some of the major things that destroy peaples beleaf in God."

A localized flood? If that's the case your God seems pretty pathetic and weak. He made it rain a lot in one, small area. Woah, calm that God down! Oh so powerful he is. Let me also ask... do you think your God caused a donkey to talk and a man to live in the belly of a whale?

Newday Posted 15:14, 07/03/2010
BlizzardAge,
Not only do you show your ignorance but youre showing an elder person who would hope the best for you a great deal of disrespect. Grow up.

BlizzardAge Posted 15:34, 07/03/2010
Newday:

Please save your moralizing and lectures on "respect" for your own children and those who are actually concerned.

Newday Posted 15:51, 07/03/2010
Free Country Bliz, if you cant take the heat go take a hike.

Heathenism Posted 16:2, 07/03/2010
Newday

How did BlizzarAge show ignorance? What he said cannot be disputed with any fact whatsoever. If a disinterested party compared the above arguments, Blizzard wins no question.

I think you understand but are afraid to admit it.

Newday Posted 17:17, 07/03/2010
A localized flood? If that's the case your God seems pretty pathetic and weak. He made it rain a lot in one, small area. Woah, calm that God down! Oh so powerful he is. Let me also ask... do you think your God caused a donkey to talk and a man to live in the belly of a whale?
--------------------------------------------------

Heathenism, Yoda and people like him are just going to be who they are.
-------------------------------------------------

The bible is written in a mindset, The Eastern mindset. It not necessary to take things into pieces that one doesnt even understand or care how and why they are written.

Example Eastern Mindset: Methusela was hundreds of years old.

Western Mindset: Methusela was a very old man.
--------------------------------------------------

If you dont care to start off with then why teke it apart at the seams it just doesnt make any sense whatsoever. It is so important that someone be right? Okay then you are right!!

Happier now?

My point exactly!!

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 17:18, 07/03/2010
Bliz<---
So you know God's name. I'm impressed. Now to make a statement that the law is no more. You must have some sort of proof. Some scripture that states it so. Some shred of evidence that what you say is true. Show me you know what you speak of. Show me your not ignorant of truth. Show your enlightenment and not your ignorance.

Why yes a localized flood. Whas the hole world wicked? Or was it that Noah was pure of his generations to save him and destroy the vile and wicked in the area he was in.

You should do more than google things. O wait wait. I forgot everything on the Internet is true. My bad your right.

But really do you have any proof of your statement?

BlizzardAge Posted 19:32, 07/03/2010
Yoda:

Nice dodging of the questions (or is it completely ignoring?). I digress.

I never said I only google things. I took those points I made right out of the Bible itself. Look it up if you question it. I even cited the verse for one of them. The other is at the end of each Gospel.

Let me give you a simple lesson in logic and break it down for you. Let's call God's attitude towards humanity "A" for the Old Testament. Now, if the New Testament was no change at all, we could call that "A" as well. However, it is clear that Yahweh's attitude towards humanity is altered in the New Testament or else there would be no need for it. Therefore, we must call the New Testament something like "not A." Yahweh clearly changes some things. They are not equivalent. Give it up.

Did a man live in the belly of a whale? Did a donkey talk? I don't know why I ask this because you presumably believe in zombies.

BlizzardAge Posted 19:50, 07/03/2010
Yoda:

You might try to weasel out of that one, so let me alter it a bit. Actually, If we call the Old Testament "A" and suppose that Yahweh doesn't change anything but simply adds to the Old Testament through the New Testament. In that case, we can call the New Testament "A+1." Even that being the case, the New Testament is not the same set of affairs as the old: A =/= A+1. It's pretty simple. It's a change.

Heathenism Posted 19:59, 07/03/2010
Newday

Are you saying that you're not a Bible believing Christian with your "mindset" theory? Shouldn't the "word of god" be universal? Shouldn't it mean what it says? No guesswork, no special education needed to interpret, just straight forward black and white.

Yoda_Joe_blie Posted 19:30, 07/04/2010
Blizz<---

I grow tired so this may be short.

First off. The miraculs? You got me. Same with the plagues on Egypt and the parting of water. Along with the bit in the desert. A God who creates the universe. The one who made everything. That God cant do any of thows things. It haunts me dearly. How can you expect a God to do stuff like that. I am wrong. Its impossible. You have proved me wrong and febleminded sir. Same as that "time" article we where discussing. I submit to your intellect.


About the old and the new. Your second analogy is more correct. It is + New. Now for there to be a difference there has to be things that are different. What is different? What has bin fulfilled by Jesus. He fulfilled prophesy and ordnances. The old and new is one book. I do fallow the laws of the old. There is nothing different. One continues book. No change.

Matthew 5:17

On a side not. If the law was stricken. I could kill and be a adulterer with out Gods condemnation. That sounds awesome!

Talking about Weaseling out. Hay -->Heathenism<-- We where haveing a discution before Bliz butted in. I would like your response in sted of attacking Newday. He and I may difer in views BUT I see him as more of a agnostic than heathen.

Anyways Ill pray you youngsters. For an adult wouldn't jump up and down or lick his lips on such matters.

Newday Posted 22:38, 07/04/2010
Heathenism,
Read what you want into what I said thats up to you and its not a theory. I take from the Bible what I understand and what I understand comes from the things Ive studied and things I find make sense. Im not grandstanding them or discussing them in open forum. They are religious and therefore private. I dont feel obligated to convert you to my way of thinking. Perhaps Yoda hasnt given up on you yet but I really dont care. I dont know what you are, what you believe and frankly dont care. I have enjoyed some intelluctual conversation with you and I know youre a smart person. Im sure you will find your own way to your belief but I dont believe a person such as you is truly satisfied with their beliefs when they continually badger a gentleman such as Yoda. Yoda may not write the best, type the best but his heart is in the right place and he believes what he believes with his heart and soul. If it came right down to it Heathen are you willing to go into that great good night believing as you do not knowing what lies on the other side or who might be there waiting to examine your life and judge you?

Those are the questions that as we age we all must face and while youre young its much easier to rebel and spit in the face of death but when youre old and youre body is tired and you have to trudge on day after day laboring against the odds you look at death just a little differently. It might bring peace put an end to the suffering of this world and if one has a happy view of what it would be like when the final call is made is that so bad?
That is all that Yoda is trying to give you. He is older and you and I and he has found some peace. Why cant that be respected? Why do you have to argue youre right with someone who has it all together? I dont know but I envy Yoda. He has no questions in his mind what is right and he would glady stake his life on it. In the end thats what matters. Its what you believe not what anyone else does.

Heathenism Posted 23:39, 07/04/2010
Newday

I once believed the Bible was the inerrant word of god. I can no long say that I believe this. Reason won't let me. And when someone like Yoda wants to engage me in a conversation about something unreasonable, well, I feel that I must shoot.

I am willing to die with my belief. We can only hope for happiness but I have no reason to believe that it would be any different than before we arrived.

I do find it unfortunate that someone finds peace in what I believe to be a lie. Maybe this is another reason I feel the need to so eagerly express my views; and you have to admit, religion is on television, radio, and every other media outlet demanding, shouting, coercing, and misguiding. For what? Benjamin Franklin perhaps?

It's interesting; why do you say Yoda has it all together? I myself have no question about what is wrong. I have their "holy books" to prove it.

BlizzardAge Posted 2:50, 07/05/2010
Newday:

"I dont know but I envy Yoda. He has no questions in his mind what is right and he would glady stake his life on it."

Precisely what is wrong with religion.

Newday Posted 6:30, 07/05/2010
Heathenism,
From the way I see things concerning you and "that comes from the way you are acting,speaking etc," about what you think you know, you really dont have things settled when it comes to religion. You would like to and its bothering you. You were once a believer of the inerrant word of God and now youve gone 180 degrees the other direction.
I will say this much about that:
In this Black and White world of religion there are many shades of gray. So many things to consider. What you choose to "believe" is up to you. I choose to "believe" that I--Newday-- do not know it all. Everytime something new is found in the desert, on Mt. Ararat--yes they think they have found Noah's Ark over there--this was fairly recent. Everytime something is found that the Catholic Church supressed "some information" we get another piece of the religious puzzle I can smile because another piece of the puzzle is yet revealed. So while none of it makes any sense whatsoever at times I believe in the wind that touches my face, the sun that comes up in the morning and I know that while we have explanations for nearly everything now a days that Im thankful for the breeze and for the sunshine and the rain. If for no other reason that to be able to talk to myself and explain to myself in the simplest terms my relationship to the universe I simply say "Thankyou God for the rain". The word God covers it all whether or not God means the Father of Christ or the Great Architect of the Universe it really doesnt matter because it means I have a relationship with all of it because I have noted my place in the universe as an inhabitant of planet earth and are thankful for the little things that make day to day living easier like the breeze, the rain and the sunshine. In the simplest terms you find your location in the universe and you find peace in knowing that you have people who care about you because when it all comes down to it. You are but a whisp of vapor or a grain of sand and about that important in the scheme of things. So you enjoy your life in peace and things you cannot change you learn to work around and you concern yourself with what makes you happy and let the small stuff take care of itself and in the end its all small stuff. What matters to you is what you think about things. The only thing in this life worth having is happiness.If you are settling for anything less than peace and happiness then you are shortchanging yourself and sure circumstances can play a major part but its your attitude that you have control over and in the end you will have only yourself to blame.
So I will tell you to keep searching for your truth in peace and learn to accept yourself for not knowing what all this religion stuff is about, maybe take a religion class or two and delve in it deeper if that makes your curiosity happy but accept the fact that none of us know it all but remember life is a sport that is played by "feel" and sometimes you simply have to learn to play it that way. Off the cuff we make decisions and decide what the next move is. Whats youre next move Heathen? For me its always about what way I can move with myself for personal growth and expansion of my financial ability that makes me able to bring my family the things they need. Then as I stand there feeling the wind on my face, the sun behind my back and rain on my cheek I know Ive done about all my potential will allow me under the circumstances and I am extremely happy with it. Then I am thankful for those things I cannot explain and I thank some one for it. I explain it all with one word although I do not understand what is behind the word the one word I use takes care of all of it new,old and forthcoming so I thank God and dont worry about the rest and continue my work because its good and it gives me peace by paying my bills and I am thankful for it. In other words I dont make it all so complicated but I stand in awe of the enormity of the universe. I dont have to believe in someone else's version or attempt to explain their existence because I understand mine as well as I can. I have my own way and Im okay with it.

Heathenism Posted 6:55, 07/05/2010
Newday

I have to run so this will be short. I've had several classes in religion and philosophy. My next move is to not digress. Religion has no integrity.

Newday Posted 7:0, 07/05/2010
then dont worry, be happy.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 10:42, 07/05/2010
I love you all.

weezie Posted 11:4, 07/05/2010
dec231991, do you believe everything the Bible says or do you pick and choose what and not to believe?

dec231991 Posted 15:34, 07/05/2010
I believe the bible is the totally inspired word of God. I beleive he inspired the people to write the words that he gave them to write. I do not take parts and say that it did not happen. You have to accept the whole Bible as true and inspired by God.

dec231991 Posted 15:35, 07/05/2010
I believe the bible is the totally inspired word of God. I beleive he inspired the people to write the words that he gave them to write. I do not take parts and say that it did not happen. You have to accept the whole Bible as true and inspired by God.

Newday Posted 6:59, 07/06/2010
Heathenism,
I will not argue over religions integrity because in proof you are right, it has none but it not about proof which is my point--its about feel. Its in what you believe and even in the unexplained. I cant explain it and you cant explain it but yet we make choices on what use to base our entire lives around. You dont believe in religion and there is a lot of doubt for a lot of things religious yet there are a lot of reasons people believe anyway.
They choose to do so because they are getting something out of the institution of religion whether they want to admit it or not. Many sit in the pew with all kinds of questions in their minds and seldom get the answers they would like to get but yet they sit.
So I do understand you because maybe questions have come up in my mind just like a lot other more silent people. My question to you is why do you feel compelled to ruin it for other folks who are happy being like they are? I think that is what you are doing and I just want to know why bother?

Heathenism Posted 7:47, 07/06/2010
Newday

Is there true happiness in living a total fraud? I think not. And it's not that I'm trying to ruin anything. I'm trying to put some good questions out there to make people study what they THINK they know. I believe that Nature is the only word of god. Am I right? I don't know but it's what I believe and that's it; no other claims. The Christian's claims are so outrageous and laughable yet they want me to accept them hands down with no proof. I can't do that like I once did.

Gotta run again.

SBD Posted 9:6, 07/06/2010
It is amazing that a religion such as evolution can claim that Christians have no proof of their claims and ridicule their beliefs but on the flip side their is no actual scientific proof FOR evolution. There is to date no witness recorded in history or alive that has seen evolution take place.

Newday Posted 13:52, 07/06/2010
Nice point Heathen. I agree in that what is a great statement and a word or words beyond true explanation. If thought is your reason for jousting I can see that but sometimes "who" you are jousting with makes the difference and I will let it go at that.Some people may not need to change or accept further enlightenment as they may be happy. I dont think you have to accept anything and its pretty plain you wont so Id let it go. I really dont care of you do or dont. Its obvious to me you believe in what you do and have good arguments for it, arguments beyond anything I could come up with as proof against. Im more like you than the other way around, Im just secure in my beliefs and I explain them the way I see fit and I will be okay until the end believing them.
The Bible is a great book and not the only book, not the only religion on the earth and while its been the one more available to me I see that there are more ways of looking at things than things to look at and Im happy when someone is content as I am.

BlizzardAge Posted 15:5, 07/06/2010
SBD:

"It is amazing that a religion such as evolution can claim that Christians have no proof of their claims and ridicule their beliefs but on the flip side their is no actual scientific proof FOR evolution. There is to date no witness recorded in history or alive that has seen evolution take place."

Wrong again, I'm afraid. There's a mountain of mutually supporting evidence for evolution. You simply choose to ignore it and remain ignorant. You have no one but yourself to blame for that.

Evidence for evolution:

* All life shows a fundamental unity in the mechanisms of replication, heritability, catalysis, and metabolism.

* Common descent predicts a nested hierarchy pattern, or groups within groups. We see just such an arrangement in a unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchy, the so-called tree of
life.

* Different lines of evidence give the same arrangement of the tree of life. We get essentially the same results whether we look at morphological, biochemical, or genetic traits.

* Fossil animals fit in the same tree of life. We find several cases of transitional forms in the fossil record.

* The fossils appear in a chronological order, showing change consistent with common descent over hundreds of millions of years and inconsistent with sudden creation.

* Many organisms show rudimentary, vestigial characters, such as sightless eyes or wings useless for flight.

* Atavisms sometimes occur. An atavism is the reappearance of a character present in a distant ancestor but lost in the organism's immediate ancestors. We only see atavisms consistent with organisms' evolutionary histories.

* Ontogeny (embryology and developmental biology) gives information about the historical pathway of an organism's evolution. For example, as embryos whales and many snakes develop hind limbs that are reabsorbed before birth.

* The distribution of species is consistent with their evolutionary history. For example, marsupials are mostly limited to Australia, and the exceptions are explained by continental drift. Remote islands often have species groups that are highly diverse in habits and general appearance but closely related genetically. Squirrel diversity coincides with tectonic and sea level changes (Mercer and Roth 2003). Such consistency still holds when the distribution of fossil species is included.

* Evolution predicts that new structures are adapted from other structures that already exist, and thus similarity in structures should reflect evolutionary history rather than function. We see this frequently. For example, human hands, bat wings, horse legs, whale flippers, and mole forelimbs all have similar bone structure despite their different functions.

* The same principle applies on a molecular level. Humans share a large percentage of their genes, probably more than 70 percent, with a fruit fly or a nematode worm.

* When two organisms evolve the same function independently, different structures are often recruited. For example, wings of birds, bats, pterosaurs, and insects all have different structures. Gliding has been implemented in many additional ways. Again, this applies on a molecular level, too.

* The constraints of evolutionary history sometimes lead to suboptimal structures and functions. For example, the human throat and respiratory system make it impossible to breathe and swallow at the same time and make us susceptible to choking.

* Suboptimality appears also on the molecular level. For example, much DNA is nonfunctional.

* Some nonfunctional DNA, such as certain transposons, pseudogenes, and endogenous viruses, show a pattern of inheritance indicating common ancestry.

* Speciation has been observed.

* The day-to-day aspects of evolution -- heritable genetic change, morphological variation and change, functional change, and natural selection -- are seen to occur at rates consistent with common descent.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA202.html

Yoda_Joe_blie Posted 15:21, 07/06/2010
Thats awesome how God created everything dont you think? He had a system that worked and dident alter it. Truly awe inspiring. Gess he has the motto "if it aint broke dont fix it"

BlizzardAge Posted 16:49, 07/06/2010
fiesta:

"Thats awesome how God created everything dont you think?"

Star Wars and vampires are pretty awesome too. The only pesky little problem is they, like God, have no basis in objective reality.

BlizzardAge Posted 16:51, 07/06/2010
fiesta:

Yoda:

"Thats awesome how God created everything dont you think?"

Star Wars and vampires are pretty awesome too. The only pesky little problem is they, like God, have no basis in objective reality.

Don't know why I thought that read "fiesta" instead of "Yoda" when I first looked at it.

BlizzardAge Posted 16:52, 07/06/2010
Yoda:

"Thats awesome how God created everything dont you think?"

Star Wars and vampires are pretty awesome too. The only pesky little problem is they, like God, have no basis in objective reality.

Don't know why I thought that read "fiesta" instead of "Yoda" when I first looked at it. And of course I copied and pasted it again. Fail.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 13:14, 07/07/2010
At least I have the answer to how and why. There is no answer to evilution. Genetic vareations some times are called mutations. Mutations dont usualy get passed to the next generation. Most mutations are bad. Why thay dont get passed to the next generation.

So if we evolved from single cell life. Where did that life come from? Primordeal ooz and a spark? So where did thows compounds come from? I havent yet seen a inert compound do much other than sit and be happy. Basicaly your saying we evolved from nothing. From the big bang where from nothing everything was created in a split second. From the singularity to rocks to life to humans. And you say im a fool.

BlizzardAge Posted 16:19, 07/07/2010
Yoda:

It pains me to read what I just did from you. Why is any answer at all good? If it's an answer that is wrong, it does you no good. Enough with the "I have an answer" bologna, as if that's a good thing. Mutations that are not beneficial to survival and reproduction do not get passed on. Mutations that are beneficial to survival and reproduction do get passed on. Evolution is about small beneficial mutations accumulating over time and those accumulations (again over vast amounts of time) bring about big changes. Evolutionary biologists have done calculations and there is, indeed, plenty of time for such large changes to take place when you have a time span of billions of years.

What you need to get life started is a self-replicating molecule. We don't know how the formation of the first such molecule occurred on Earth. We can, however, create such things in the lab, so we know it is possible for conditions on the ancient Earth to have been proper for life to develop. It's not a matter of can it happen... it's a matter of figuring out exactly how it happened. Big difference.

And if you're going to argue about going back to the big bang and getting something from nothing, I admit we do not know where the universe came from. No one does, especially not those backwater texts you think are inspired by God. It does not help to postulate a God because his origins are also unknown and, furthermore, we have no reason to believe such a being exists. Science explains complicated things through simple things. Complex life is explained via the accumulated evolution of relatively more simple organisms. The universe is explained in the same way... simple beginnings to the complexity we see today. It actually hurts the explanatory power of your argument to postulate a God because such a being would have to be highly complex. You're, in essence, attempting to explain the complex with something more complex and you are left with an even greater mystery. You've got it backwards.

Yoda_Joe_blie Posted 20:4, 07/07/2010
Well then. You admit to yourself you know nothing about how things happend. Scientists say it happend but thay cant reproduce it. If thay have produced life in a test tube id like for you to link it. So your view is that a bunch of peaple think it happened this way. My view is God made it so.

Ill stick to my view knowing exactly what happed.
You stick you your view of not knowing anything but it was that way.

Yoda_Joe_blie Posted 20:9, 07/07/2010
O one more thing.

Something to think about.
How menny ansestors did you have that dident get eaten, hurt, stuck, or killed. Long inuff for them to reproduce. To make the next generation. That dident get Eaten, Hurt, Stuck, or killed. so on and so on. Billions of years. Think of the Vast amount of mutations that had to live and reproduce with the chance of passing that gene along. so on and so on.


Just something to think about.

BlizzardAge Posted 20:37, 07/07/2010
Yoda:

All I got from that was "I believe it, leave me alone." You provided no evidence whatsoever. I'm sorry, but mere assertions are not an argument for your magic being in the sky. Let me put this simply. I admit I don't know (nor does anyone). The only difference between me and you is that you pretend you have an answer when in fact you have nothing but superstition.

Link:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A04E5D61F31F937A25756C0A96F9C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

or

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides/

Yoda_Joe_blie Posted 0:33, 07/08/2010
I can cook up a mean stew as well. Its not alive eather.

BlizzardAge Posted 1:40, 07/08/2010
Yoda:

You have absolutely no clue what you're even talking about. You can cook a mean stew? Are you f***ing serious? This is why debates with creationists are usually entirely pointless... you are ignorant beyond belief.

Grams Posted 8:37, 07/08/2010
Blizzard, you are not the know-all, be-all of the universe. Yoda is entitled to an opinion same as you and all of us are equal when it comes to the first amendment, at least at present. That might not be true by the time the current person that is masquerading as a president gets through. Calling others ignorant and stupid, displaying your arrogance in the manner you do shows you are the one that REALLY has no education. Education is only as good as the manner in which you use it.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 11:53, 07/08/2010
Well now Bliz. Lets see here. I asked you for proof of man creating life. You gave me not one but 2 articals saying the same thing. A man put some chemicals together. Heated them up. When we was finished he had a totaly diferent chemical witch bonded together. WOW!!!!

My reply. "I can cook up a mean stew as well. Its not alive eather."

Let me break it down to make it more simple for you to understand.

I can throw some stuff in a pot.
Heat it up.
I will end up with Stew.
Its as alive as what your chemist did.

Im sorry I speak in riddles some times. It was totaly my falt. You couldent figer out the analogy or dident read what you posted. The same story in 2 diferent links.

So once again i ask you. Link 1 story of man creating life.

The Bible has my story.

This is why debates with evolutionists are entierly pointless. As i sead before. You are blind.

BlizzardAge Posted 13:43, 07/08/2010
Grams:

You can say whatever you wish and I reserve the right to call you and whoever else a moron when you say idiotic things.

Yoda:

It's called RNA. Not "some chemicals." They had a self-replicating molecule, which is what's needed for life to get started. Our bodies are composed of trillions of little robots, doing their mindless jobs. The starting point with life is to get that initial condition necessary for it to form. Again, you know nothing. There's no need to break anything down because you are extremely ignorant. You want to hold up your ancient book filled with zombies, unicorns, whale-living men, talking donkeys, etc., and then say I'm blind? Please.

So you can create self-replicating molecules in your pot? Damn, you should have taken that to a university and gotten some news! Stop embarrassing yourself. You have the intellectual curiosity of of a toddler.

SBD Posted 14:21, 07/08/2010
limp wrist--you can't call anyone anything and be justified. the only reason you are a suppoosed true beliver of evolution is that it lets you live your putrid lifestyle with no consequences for your actions- plain and simple. crawl back in your closet and shut up or just go call mommy and cry to her that people just don't understand you. PLEASEEEEEEE lol

SBD Posted 15:0, 07/08/2010
Limp wrist, here is a video explanation as to why you are brainwashed so badly. Lloyd Pye seems to have it simplified and you will be really excited as he plainly states that the homos are here--

http://www.disclose.tv/members/action/viewvideo/45266/Lloyd_Pye___Everything_You_Know_is_Wrong_1_6/

SBD Posted 15:31, 07/08/2010
Bliz, is this wher you got your start? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5VNe9NTOxA&feature=related


HERE IS you cereal http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lfbe-xzGoQU&feature=related

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 18:17, 07/08/2010
/sigh

Quote from Bliz:

"They had a self-replicating molecule, which is what's needed for life to get started."

Let me highlight something from that.
"for life to get started"

Ok im ignorant.

BTW thanks for the compliment.
"You have the intellectual curiosity of of a toddler."

Toddlers are a vast wealth of intelectual curiosity. Yes thay strive to grow. Thanks agian for your kind words.


Anyways. Keep trying to grow and expand your abilitys to have a discution with some one. I may be all thows names you called me. Your still blind. There is allways name calling when peaple start lousing an argumant. Then ther is SBD. I think he dont like you. I would personaly quote Leviticus 18:22 and try to save your soul.

peace be with you.

Heathenism Posted 21:22, 07/08/2010
SBD

How can you speak of freedom and of liberty when you refer to someone in the context you did. Consequences for what? Your little Bible will never be the law of the land. It was intentionally left out; of everything. Read it and you'll know why.

fiesta pantalones Posted 21:25, 07/08/2010
So life came from a magic mud puddle. But not only one little life had to pop up, but more than one. The first one had to be able to feed itself so that it could replicate. Of course they had to be close enough to each so that the predator could reach the prey before starving. So assuming the predator popped out of the magic mud puddle with a means of locamotion and the ability to find its prey and by the grace of God (excuse me) possessed the ability to devour its prey, it had to replicate. At some point a member of the opposite sex that is sexually compatible had to pop of the the same magic mud puddle (or maybe a different magic mud puddle if the first one had the ability to travel to another magic mud puddle and find a sexual partner) so that they could replicate.

Wow. It takes a lot of faith to cling to the religion that is known as evolution. I just don't have that amount of faith.

BlizzardAge Posted 21:31, 07/08/2010
Yoda:

How many toddlers have you seen question the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, or Santa Clause? The overwhelming majority accept it without question.

The problem here is I have a coherent definition of life, while you do not. If you expect biologists to be able to create something in a poof of smoke in a jar, like a spider, you're delusional. This shows you know nothing about evolution because you've wasted whatever intellectual ability you have absorbing Biblical myths. The self-replicating molecule is the spark of life. It is that type of molecule that evolution hinges on, because over vast amounts of time, error in replication causes an organism to become more adapted to its environment and can cause it to build up complexity. You're not being coherent.

"Ok im ignorant."

Yes, you are and bafflingly so.

BlizzardAge Posted 21:38, 07/08/2010
fiesta:

"So life came from a magic mud puddle. But not only one little life had to pop up, but more than one. The first one had to be able to feed itself so that it could replicate. Of course they had to be close enough to each so that the predator could reach the prey before starving. So assuming the predator popped out of the magic mud puddle with a means of locamotion and the ability to find its prey and by the grace of God (excuse me) possessed the ability to devour its prey, it had to replicate. At some point a member of the opposite sex that is sexually compatible had to pop of the the same magic mud puddle (or maybe a different magic mud puddle if the first one had the ability to travel to another magic mud puddle and find a sexual partner) so that they could replicate.

Wow. It takes a lot of faith to cling to the religion that is known as evolution. I just don't have that amount of faith."

From the start, that is simply one massive straw man. Furthermore, I can grant you all of that, arguendo, and you still fail abysmally because you are philosophically illiterate.

Allow me to explain. You're trying to compare the relative probabilities of two different things: naturalism versus supernaturalism. You can't do it. Sorry to burst your little bubble, my friend. You can compare the probability of natural events (which is what evolution is based on), but you absolutely cannot do that with supernaturalism. So, no matter how many arguments from personal incredulity you make (which is slapped all over what you blathered about above) you will never get to the conclusion that supernaturalism is more probable than any natural event, no matter how improbable it is. Try again.

fiesta pantalones Posted 21:48, 07/08/2010
Actually you need to try again (and work on your reading comprehension while you are at it). Your little article says that they didn't quite create an RNA molecule. Here is a quote for you to try again to take in...

"Dr. Sutherland said he had not yet found natural ways to generate the two other types of nucleotide found in RNA molecules"....

Hmmmm....sounds like you have a case of Piltdown Syndrome. If you can't find proof of evolution, just make some up and spread it. Of course I don't have the faith you do, so maybe it would make sense if I clinged to your religion as tightly as you do.

BlizzardAge Posted 22:11, 07/08/2010
fiesta:

I like how you side-stepped my nice exposition of your buffoonery. I'll move on, though.

Look, I'm not evolutionary biologist, but it seems your reading comprehension is highly lacking itself. The article says that scientists could already create RNA given ribonucleotides, but the creation of the ribonucleotides themselves had been a mystery. Now they can create RNA from basic elements, since they figured out how to create ribonucleotides. If you need something a little bit more spelled out for you, here you go: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100222162009.htm

Happy learning.

BlizzardAge Posted 22:15, 07/08/2010
fiesta:

Let me go one step further and point out a couple key sentences in case you get lost in your own delusions again:

"However, though researchers have been able to show how RNA’s component molecules, called ribonucleotides, could assemble into RNA, their many attempts to synthesize these ribonucleotides have failed."

"'By changing the way we mix the ingredients together, we managed to make ribonucleotides,' said Sutherland."

The failure here is all yours. Congratulations.

Yoda_Joe_blie Posted 22:19, 07/08/2010
Blizz<--- Cant you be nice? Shoor a jab or two but come on now. "Buffoonery" With that vocabulary you should stay above the fray.

fiesta pantalones Posted 22:25, 07/08/2010
Nooooo.....actually the article says....

"If all four nucleotides formed naturally, then they zipped together easily to form an RNA molecule with a backbone of alternating sugar and phosphate groups. The bases attached to the sugar constitute a four-letter alphabet in which biological information can be represented."

but the paragraph before it says.....

"Dr. Sutherland said he had not yet found natural ways to generate the two other types of nucleotide found in RNA molecules"

So actually it says that RNA has not been created, only half of the nucleotides that are required. All I am saying is that your religion is laughable. I showed how laughable it is by laying out a mere fraction of what would have to have happened in the magic mud puddle for evolution to be true. Then I simply copied and pasted a couple of paragraphs from a link you provided (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A04E5D61F31F937A25756C0A96F9C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) in which it stated what you were claiming was a lie (scientists naturally created RNA in a lab). It was just another example of the Piltdown Syndrome (lying to try to prove your religion true made famous by Piltdown Man) that you exhibit a classic example of.

fiesta pantalones Posted 22:30, 07/08/2010
Ohhh Blizzard -

A you having a mental Plitdown yet? Keep digging that hole!

You really do make me laugh.

BlizzardAge Posted 23:5, 07/08/2010
fiesta:

We are quoting from two different articles. I quoted from the second one. Anyway, I think you are totally missing the point. RNA has been created in the lab (read again... HAS BEEN), but it was unknown how the ribonucleotides themselves formed. That is to say, it was not known how it was even possible to create RNA from pure scratch, even though they could still create RNA itself. This experiment shows that ribonucleotides themselves can be created in the lab and synthesized into RNA. Even if the creation of the other types of ribonucleotides have not been performed in the lab as of yet, we now know that it is possible in principle to do it. All you're doing is reading more into what I was claiming. I never said anything about the necessity of every single form of ribonucleotide to be demonstrated (give them a few more years and I assure you they'll have that down too). Again, creating RNA has been done, but the importance of this research shows that science can even explain how the smaller constituent parts can form.

If you look at the article I just posted above, the important factor is self-replication. That's what matters and we've got it. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100222162009.htm

"I showed how laughable it is by laying out a mere fraction of what would have to have happened in the magic mud puddle for evolution to be true."

And I explained how that gets you no where, but evidently you are too dense to understand basic logic. What you wrote was an extreme straw man (displaying an immense misunderstanding of basic biology: go read on the evolution of sexual organisms, for instance, if you're so baffled by it), and I cannot correct that much ignorance. Correcting your own personal incredulity is a task all your own.

Happy learning!

BlizzardAge Posted 23:7, 07/08/2010
fiesta:

"A you having a mental Plitdown yet? Keep digging that hole!"

Not sure what you're talking about, but okay. Might want to work on your spelling there too, big fella.

SBD Posted 8:21, 07/09/2010
Lloyd Pye explains actual evidence and proof from a non-christian point of view which is refreshing and does sink the arguments used by the evolutionist. I used the word arguments because there is no actual proof for anything the religion founded by CD and continued by the arsehole brit.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 11:29, 07/09/2010
Wow bliz. Your offle person. My gess synce its a "CHOICE" to be homosexual. You had trubble makeing a conection with weman. I wonder if it was your attitude or your inability to get allong with peaple. It may have bin easyer for you to say your homosexual than to actualy take the effot and be with a woman. Your probably single and with out man companeion do to the same reson. May have bin your parents dumped you off on your grandparents and abandond you. You may be in your early 30s but you act like a know it all kid. Its realy sad you have to bash other peaple just to make yourself feal better. Whatever you think at the end of this. What little satisfaction you get. You will not be any happyer than you where before you sead the first word. Its sad how ability can be waisted as you are doing and showing.

God loves you for being you. You dont have to act and pretend your someone or something elce to redirect your pain. Your "CHOICE" to act and posibly be a Homosexual is not the solution. God is the solution. If you take his gideance and let him stear you in the right way. Maybe you could find a nice girl and spend your days together. God gave us "CHOICES" do the right thing. Beleave in him and be happy. What you have is not Happyness. Its bial and victreal.

dingo59 Posted 12:38, 07/09/2010
homosexuals are not "born that way". God does not make mistakes of any kind and that would be a biggie!!! Goodness!

BlizzardAge Posted 16:30, 07/09/2010
Yoda:

"It may have bin easyer for you to say your homosexual than to actualy take the effot and be with a woman."

It's pretty simple. I'm not attracted to women sexually. They do nothing for me. I do have a boyfriend, but thanks for your concern.

dingo59:

"homosexuals are not "born that way". God does not make mistakes of any kind and that would be a biggie!!! Goodness!"

You should side with Fred Phelps from Westboro Baptist Church. He thinks homosexuals (among other people) were created by God that way, but he calls them a "vessel of wrath." In other words, he says God created homosexuals in order to send them to Hell. Sounds pretty cool to me. I want to be a vessel of wrath.

Heathenism Posted 19:4, 07/09/2010
dingo59

When your brain develops, you'll understand that we don't choose our sexuality.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 19:10, 07/09/2010
Im glad your comfertable with your choice. One of us is at least.

Westboro well then. I actualy hear what thay are saying. I dont agree with there actions and some of there conclusions. it is a sad thing when peaple take and twist things to sout there owen selfish needs.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 19:15, 07/09/2010
Heathen<--- Offcorse its a choice. I dont beleave God would make that. As an evelutionist im shore you would understand that a trate like homosexuality would of bin bread out millions of years ago. You do know you cant continue the speacies as a homosexual dont you? Evulutionists would be the first to say it a choice. Go back to your books and re read that good trates are passed and bad are not thing in your evulution handbook thing.

BlizzardAge Posted 20:26, 07/09/2010
Yoda:

"Heathen<--- Offcorse its a choice. I dont beleave God would make that. As an evelutionist im shore you would understand that a trate like homosexuality would of bin bread out millions of years ago. You do know you cant continue the speacies as a homosexual dont you? Evulutionists would be the first to say it a choice. Go back to your books and re read that good trates are passed and bad are not thing in your evulution handbook thing."

That's wrong. There are many different ways that homosexuality can be passed on. Genes have to co-exist with one another in the gene pool, so if there is a gene or cluster of genes that tends to give an organism same-sex attraction it could be complimentary to other genes in the gene pool which actually further survival and reproduction. Homosexuality would ride along with those genes and, in the aggregate, it would be beneficial to the organism. A close parallel would be sickle cell anemia, which is detrimental to an organism. However, if an organism is given two copies of the sickle cell gene it becomes immune to malaria, which is highly beneficial to the organism. Evolution works on probabilities and so long as, in the long run, the benefits of a trait (even if it carries something detrimental to survival and reproduction along with it) outweigh the detriments it will get passed on as beneficial to the organism. This is how many genetic diseases continue to exist.

In short, it's not nearly as simple as you're trying to make it.

Heathenism Posted 20:56, 07/09/2010
So, Yoda, can you tell us about the faithful day when you chose your sexuality? After all, you said it's a choice. Tell us about that experience......

SBD Posted 23:1, 07/09/2010
bliz, from reading your post above I understand why you made your last sentenence. You must make your religion sound complicated to sway the shallow minded or the arrogant intellectuals that are above the rest of the normal population or at least they want everyone to think they are. Now why don't you really impress us all and point out thru each of the Lloyd Pye videos where he and his theories are wrong. Put that little twisted abnormal warped higher than anyone alse's IQ in forward motion and show us all just how damn smart you really think you are. I will gladly read your entire post and with pleasure do the reasearch on your answers as I am sure there will be plenty since, number 1 he blew evolution out of the water and number 2 since he didn't make any indications that queers were produced from birth by the methods he believes we were created. Do you use lemon juice on your crow when you eat it?

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 11:57, 07/10/2010
Bliz<-- Offcorse its as simple as I make it sound. You are looking at it in recent times. Long term. In long term it would be bread out. Millions of years. so your allso saying 1 gene would control 2 things or that a combination wold couse that effect. Wouldent that combination be bread out? Genetic deseses now is a seperat issue. I think that Genetic desseses where coused by breeding. Mixing of races and such. Sycle cell anemea can be bread out quit easyly. Why is it not? Like you sead it benificial. Actual genetic deseses would of bin bread out if there was not the medicin of today where breeding among the races is rampent. Just thing back in the early days of humans when the averadge life span was low to begin with. would that trate survive long inuff to bread and pass it on? If you say we evolved and that evulution brot us to where we are than you have to includ the other parts of evulution and survival of the fittest. Whatever trate that gene may have provided to make a combination that produced homosexuality would of bin bread out naturaly thrue the years. Like i sead you cant use a hypothasus to explane one and not apply it to other things. Picking and chousing what fits and what not,

Heathen<--- Ill be glad to tell ya. I enjoy the femail form greatly. Not on viagra yet. It will be an option when the time comes.
That day was a downer. Played that spin the bottle but with 10 min in the bedroom. I realy dident like her and never called her back but what the heck. I was yung and impetuas.

SBD Posted 8:43, 07/15/2010
Vanguard is doing some documentaries now on several different subjects. Last nite they were in Ughanda interviewing people concerning a new law they want passed in that country that outlaws homosexuals. It was very interesting, did anyone else see it?

BlizzardAge Posted 9:42, 07/15/2010
SBD:

Didn't see it, but I know of the law. Thankfully most western countries threatened to withdraw aid to Uganda if that law passed, so the death penalty provision for homosexuality was removed. For the sake of Uganda's gay men and women, I hope it never passes, no matter the form.

Heathenism Posted 19:8, 07/17/2010
Yoda

You call that an answer? Come on. Have another go at it.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 11:30, 07/19/2010
Don't really kiss and tell. Not saying I showed my first any respect. Why not start now.

Heathenism Posted 16:55, 07/19/2010
You don't get it do you?

BlizzardAge Posted 9:44, 07/20/2010
Yoda:

"Offcorse its as simple as I make it sound. You are looking at it in recent times. Long term. In long term it would be bread out. Millions of years. so your allso saying 1 gene would control 2 things or that a combination wold couse that effect. Wouldent that combination be bread out?"

I told you, no, it does not necessarily get bred out. I'm constantly astounded by people who know virtually nothing about evolution yet claim to speak on its behalf. I'm certainly not a professional biologist, but I know enough to call bull on your nonsense.

Some genes survive simply because they are good at cooperating with the other genes in the gene pool and their net effect is positive. I explained how it is possible to get a net positive effect with genetic diseases. Homosexuality may work the same way. We simply do not know. My point in drawing the analogy for you is to show that evolution does not necessarily weed out homosexuality.

It's also important to recall that sexuality is not pigeonholed into distinct categories: it is a continuum, meaning many people possess some degree of bisexuality. If a predisposition for homosexuality is genetic, it could be passed on simply through bisexuals breeding, with the offspring displaying more or less intense forms of same-sex attraction. There is also a theory among evolutionary biologists that in humanity's ancestral past, homosexuality was beneficial because it allowed those who were homosexuals to take care of the offspring of their kin, thereby increasing the survival rate of the children in those families, as the homosexuals would have no children of their own. This would also pass on homosexuality if it is genetic since the gene would reside in the children who survive in this way (it simply is not expressed).

" Actual genetic deseses would of bin bread out if there was not the medicin of today where breeding among the races is rampent."

Breeding among the races?!?! What? The civil war is over. Put down your musket.







Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 12:5, 07/20/2010
Selectively cherry picking the theory of evolution.
Didn't know the civil war was about race mixing.

I do know more than you think about evolution. I'm just going by the evolution laws set out in the theory. I didn't know you could pick and choose the degree in witch it's applied. Gess you learn something new every day.

I always thot the civil war was about states right. O well wrong again I presume.

If God or evolution for that matter wanted everyone to mix. There would not be a separate race.

BlizzardAge Posted 20:32, 07/20/2010
Yoda:

"Selectively cherry picking the theory of evolution."

Mere assertion. I don't even know what it would mean to "cherry pick" evolution. You're going to need to be specific about that one.

"I do know more than you think about evolution."

No you do not. With every word you write, your vast ignorance about the subject is evident.

"I didn't know you could pick and choose the degree in witch it's applied."

And by this statement you make a tacit admission that you do not understand what I said. My whole point in explaining what I did above was to show how homosexuality is compatible with evolution via natural selection. I'm applying it as it should be. This obviously flew right over your head.

"If God or evolution for that matter wanted everyone to mix. There would not be a separate race."

This is idiotic and further exposes your complete lack of understanding about evolution. Evolution does not "want" anything. Evolution has no aforethought; it is blind to the future. Furthermore, races exist due to the geographic distribution and separation of human populations over geologic time, allowing each population to slowly adapt to its own environment. All human ancestry has been traced back to Africa, so the first human beings had darker skin like those in Africa do today. Over time, groups started to migrate out of Africa and into cooler northern climates. Less melanin in the skin was actually beneficial to survival in these cooler northern climates so the dark skin faded slowly over time. This explanation for races has been around for a long time in evolutionary biology. And not surprisingly you know nothing about it.

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 11:17, 07/21/2010
"Cherry pick"<--- further on in your statement you say evolution is blind, wants nothing, and has no forthot. Ok and so do I. A trate that will prevent a speces from reproducing is by far the most detramentle genetic defect you can have. At what % did the trait manifest itself. Wouldn't that same trate be like not being born with reproductive organs. There are such people. Althow that's called a genetic disorder. Still fishy for evolution witch is blind to let some things slide and others not.

"Out of Africa"<--- not the only theory and or solution. Let's look at the migration idea. We all came out of Africa. For some reson one day Africans migrated north for whatever reson. Changed color then suddenly stoped migrating. For no reson move and keep moving then for no reson stop. Interesting. That would explain it.

Did you know. Blacks have a higher lung cancer rate than whites? Do you know why yellow people are yellow? Why black have very little loyalty to there mates and or why whites and yellows have more? How about the genitalia. Why the difference in size are between the 3 colors? The rate of procreation between the races? Well then all thows can be answers thrue evolution.

Here is a link to a great book of evolutionary research.
http://erectuswalksamongst.us/

May I say to you one more time. Evolution may be your answer to things absolutely not mine. You relie on randomness and blind luck for your existace. I do not. You excuse your condition on genetics. I do not.



BlizzardAge Posted 12:51, 07/21/2010
Yoda:

Can you read? Go back and read where I explained how evolution could, in fact, pass on genes that tend to make an individual attracted to the same sex. The problem here is you don't seem to grasp that it's not just about the individual passing on his genes in his body. Close kin share a high percentage of their genetic makeup, so promotion of a close relative's survival and reproduction will propagate your own genes. It's that simple! I took time to explain a few different ways that this can work but you continue to ignore it. Either that or you are simply incompetent.

Look, genius, about the Africa issue, geneticists can use mitochondria and trace human ancestry back through maternal lineages. In fact, National Geographic used to (and may still) have a program where you can send in a skin sample and they will trace your ancestral line back to show you where your ancestors migrated from once they left Sub-Saharan Africa. People migrate. It's how we got on the damn North American continent! And our ancestors didn't simply change color with the snap of a finger. It took hundreds or even thousands of generations before the full change was in place. What happens is you get variation in skin tone within a population and those individuals who had genes for less melanin, over time, slowly saw an increase in their representation in the population. Slowly the color/tone of the skin faded for northern migrants as the populations in those areas genetically drifted towards less melanin, given that it had a very slight advantage for health due to the environmental change.

Also, these "yellows," like Asians and Native Americans, have an "in between" skin tone because their ancestors migrated south again after migrating north, causing those populations to slowly drift towards increased melanin, aka darker skin tones. If you do a little educating of yourself you might learn some of these basic things.

When you get populations isolated from one another in different environments, even if only slightly different, you can still get changes over long spans of time due to genetic drift. Educate yourself, please!

Yoda_Joe_Blie Posted 14:4, 07/21/2010
Still wishful thinking bliz. You should read some of that link I posted. It's about both theorys about evolution. It's something called a book. Books used to educate people before TV did.
Education is not about watching a NatGeo program. There is reading involved. Reading that has credable sources.

At this point I'm giving up. No need to discuss a topic that is not known by the other person. If you would of clicked on the link. Looked at the chapters or even looked at the beginning. You could see there are other theorys out there.

Btw yellow skin is pigmented from the fat under the skin closer to the surface. It's a trait inherited from people who lived in very cold climate. Kinda like insolation.
That's atleast what the non-out of Africa theory ses. But who am I to know this.

God created everything. The Adam was not the first man. The Adam is my great x a bunch grandad.

BlizzardAge Posted 14:56, 07/21/2010
Yoda:

"Education is not about watching a NatGeo program. There is reading involved. Reading that has credable sources."

My boxes upon boxes full of read books seem to dispute your allegation that I only learn from television.

I tried to correct your ignorance regarding the evolution of races along with how evolution and homosexuality are not necessarily incompatible. Either you are an imbecile or dishonest. I'm not entirely sure which it is, but I'm leaning towards the former. If you want some books to read, I can give you plenty to chew on for months in this subject alone.

"God created everything."

Positive evidence please.

Heathenism Posted 19:4, 07/22/2010
http://www.southbendtribune.com/article/20100722/Opinion/7220362/-1/googleNews



REPLY :
Username :
(required)
Password :
(required)
Comment :




© Copyright 2010, Yadkin View. All Rights Reserved.
Questions or comments? Email info@yadkinview.com 		Web Design by www.goWilkes.com