I've found my calling

[derek]

For a bunch of people who stake their claim against Christianity for their methods of spreading the religion's beliefs you sure are imposing your anti-beliefs on that Jace Mereel twat pretty hard. Go ahead and crush her self stability and reliance on her convictions; I'll giggle a tad and think it's rather funny. At least, though, realize the hypocrisy, and that right now you're no better than the Bible toting fanatics you preach against.

I was aware that was probably gonna happen. I said my thing with no vitriol, and really only suggested alternatives. I only think that "spirituality" (I'm using the term loosely) doesn't need taken down a particular dogmatic avenue.

I was hoping to avoid a debate (it's never been my strong point), so I'll leave it at this. I "buy" into Christianity foremost because while people see the Bible and teachings as spiritual stories, a giant parable, there's a lot of scientific truth behind it, the "Universal" flood, human creation, OLD EARTH creation as a whole, etc. I'm not a big fan of the mooshy salvation, love-thy-neighbor stuff, but I try to act appropriately because if the first chunk of the Bible is scientifically sound, then shouldn't the second half have merit...

Ugh, who knows if that makes sense. And I know there'll be the classic responses. But there you have it.

It just doesn't make any sense. There's no science in there. Only human beings trying to rationalise and understand their existence. It sociologically interesting, but people today should know to leave it there. The Bible is an interesting collection of works, but it's hardly veracious.

But y'know, none of this really matters.

 

[flying_whale]

Also thus proving AIDS has been rampant since the dawn of man. Yeah."

WTF my pals????

 

[Jace_Mereel]

My Cap'n, you never disappoint.

 

[mReEtTaIlRsEkD]

tupac was more talented than jesus, and it saddens me that the majority of my wonderful white race believes in jesus more than tupac, whereas the majority of blacks believe in tupac over jesus. fo shame.

 

[Malergion]

I was wondering when this thread would turn bitter. Thanks, James et al.

 

[mReEtTaIlRsEkD]

I try.

 

[Malergion]

Yes. Yes you do.

 

[Jace_Mereel]

Don't forget that they have scientific proof of that there ark existing... Was totally big enough to fit all those animals on it, along with food for them and other various supplies. And they totally didn't get sick from drinking flood water.

The term "universal flood" has been altered to mean a world-wide flood by today's standards. But it's actually meant to describe the effect of the flood, not the size. The Genesis flood was really a localized flood near Mesopotamia/East Africa. But being that at that time that area was all that was known to the humans it was universal.

"It means that if human beings had spread as far as Antarctica, the Flood would cover Antarctica, destryong the Emperor penguins along with the people, except those aboard the ark. If no people lived in Antarctica, God would have no reason to destroy the place or its penguins. No would Noah be required to take a pair of Emperor penguins aboard the ark." - The Genesis Question, Hugh Ross​

DNA studies on human origins and the hominid fossil record indicate that man kind (homo sapien sapien) can be traced back to a single man and woman living in East Africa, not too far from the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers (and the other two) described in the Bible to be the location of Eden and it's Garden. Human origins date back 10,000 to 100,000 years ago.

Human evolution has been heated up with evidence that the fossil record doesn't scroll out the way it should, were it to follow the rules of evolution. Due to recent studies, major parts of the record need to be reorganized and structured. For instance, paleoanthropologists have proven that Neanderthals aren't our ancestors and don't really have evidence for our lineage being connected to homo ergaster/erectus. And now there is more evidence against humans descending from the Australopithecines than for it. I bring this up because Christian creation says God created modern humans in his image and kept his hand in the creation process rather than give it up to complete naturalistic evolution. The whole hominid fossil record stuff I was talking about gives merit to this Creation idea (though I left out a whole bunch of stuff that would probably make more sense ).

There's dupa-loads more on this science for the Bible stuff than what I can go into. I'm by no means an authority and I still have a lot of research before I can completely understand both sides of the fence. But that's my schpeel for now.

Sorry, if it's not as well structured as an essay. What do you expect, I'm an art major.

 

[WhiteBeastofWotan]

My cock being gigantic was a result of evolution, not god, hun.

 

[mReEtTaIlRsEkD]

lol. I like how the DNA verifying that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens are not related somehow trumps the what? 1000 year gap? 10000? ...and instantly lends credence to Christianity.

There are two sides to the fence. A botched historical record of paranoid humans and scientific theory.
A bunch of crackpot creationists gripping onto theories and trying to fit them into the puzzle that is the bible is beneath the fucking fence.

I'm not trying to change your mind here; clearly nothing said is going to crack through the conditioning of that giant steel visor pinned to your mind's eye.

Seeking scientific evidence is a breach of faith, way to sin little lady.

 

[WhiteBeastofWotan]

Hey jace, there was a huge hurricane that hit Providence in the 30s, was that an act of god? Providence is, after all, a very sinful city.

 

[Jace_Mereel]

lol. I like how the DNA verifying that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens are not related somehow trumps the what? 1000 year gap? 10000? ...and instantly lends credence to Christianity.

There are two sides to the fence. A botched historical record of paranoid humans and scientific theory.
A bunch of crackpot creationists gripping onto theories and trying to fit them into the puzzle that is the bible is beneath the fucking fence.

I'm not trying to change your mind here; clearly nothing said is going to crack through the conditioning of that giant steel visor pinned to your mind's eye.

Seeking scientific evidence is a breach of faith, way to sin little lady.

1. It's a book-load to explain everything and not something I can easily get into. As I mentioned, I'm not very good at this kind of thing; I have a great love for it but that doesn't mean I can spout it off to others. I can give you a list of books instead if you're not just putzing around with me and really wanna know.

2. Specifically, what "botched historical record of paranoid humans" are you speaking of? The Bible? The Bible's Old Testament is nowhere near a textbook, but a general timeline. That's where the Young Earth Creationists get mixed up, adding up the geneologies' ages and literal 6 day creation period to get a 6-10,000 year old Earth.

3. & 4. No where in the Bible is it a sin to seek scientific evidence. Whomever told you that needs a few lessons on theology and a good dose of logic. In fact, Paul states clearly that people are to be skeptical of the Scripture and teachings so they aren't confused with crap ideas of truth. The pastors/ministers/priests that say science isn't a part of Christianity usually come with a belief that excepting science is excepting naturalistic evolution which doesn't fall into that whole Creation plan. In truth, Old-Earth Creationists have more in common with Evolutionists than with Young-Earth Creationists.

And wanna quit with the indirect name calling? It hurts my feelings.

 

[mReEtTaIlRsEkD]

Now my earliest post seems to hold more water.

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

*shakes head* christians. I really do, truely hate them all.

 

[Jace_Mereel]

*shakes head* christians. I really do, truely hate them all.

I thought you loved me.

 

[mReEtTaIlRsEkD]

Sorry, by all means it would be interesting to actually learn all of the discoveries humanity has made with evolution and then cross reference with the bible, but I'd rather read Batman comics.

Yes; bible, history, timeline, whatever. It's pretty botched and fantastical at times.

I'm not saying "seeking" is a sin, but substituting faith for a "logical and most probably misinterpreted" explanation is, hence breach of faith. ie, "the WORLD flooded? that's fucking crazy, I'ma look into that shit." I like christians best when you challenge them and they're like, "I don't know, it's just what's in the bible/what God said." Complete and utter adherence to the bible; blind obedience ftw.

I didn't call you anything. You see life through a christian visor, which I consider to be a giant steel one, most probably driven into your skull by your parents.

 

[mReEtTaIlRsEkD]

IRC it up pengy.

 

[Jace_Mereel]

Sorry, by all means it would be interesting to actually learn all of the discoveries humanity has made with evolution and then cross reference with the bible, but I'd rather read Batman comics.

A discovery made by a scientist looking through an evolutionary visor, if you will, does not make the discovery a piece of evolution. Guys looking for facts with a mind set in evolution/non-christian ideals have made amazing discoveries through the ages, but that doesn't mean it debunks Christianity.

I'm not saying "seeking" is a sin, but substituting faith for a "logical and most probably misinterpreted" explanation is, hence breach of faith. ie, "the WORLD flooded? that's fucking crazy, I'ma look into that shit." I like christians best when you challenge them and they're like, "I don't know, it's just what's in the bible/what God said." Complete and utter adherence to the bible; blind obedience ftw.

Sorry I'm not your particular flavor. I'm sorry then when I realize that "I don't know" I look into it and try to educate myself on all sides. It's a big reason I hate to get into religious debates. I DON'T know everything and you encounter people such as yourself (and dear Wolftribe) that insist if I don't know the answer, the whole argument must be wrong.

I didn't call you anything. You see life through a christian visor, which I consider to be a giant steel one, most probably driven into your skull by your parents.

Yes, my parents took me to church every Sunday. But my dad made a point to teach me both sides of the argument and leave the decision making to me. Lo siento hermano, you can't blame this on my parents. Or my church. If my perception of the world is skewed it is because of human nature and not deliberate bias. I try to keep an open mind to ideas and the like even the ones I think are bogus. I try to educate myself on all aspects of my beliefs and those contrary to it. I believe I've chosen the best one.

I try not to impose my beliefs upon others. I avoid these types of debates because I don't have all the answers and most people don't want anything to do with 'em. If you have a problem with my beliefs or any religion's, then it's best to ignore them rather than start a verbal attack (which despite your insistence you have done) against said group.

 

[mReEtTaIlRsEkD]

I've not requested a single explanation from you. Part of my skepticism/criticism was aimed at creationists. I've read tons of their crackpot theories and GENERALLY, they hear the idea of a theory and are like, PUZZLE PIECE 23143 for the bible, woo!

Kudos for wanting to be able to answer things properly, but all I commented on was the difficulty and obstacles you encounter when you're doing so for a religion SO HEAVILY BASED ON FAITH.

The visor idea was just an illustration of what adhering to dogma, imo, does to a person. (fucks them up) and way to decide for yourself and have an awesome dad, I suppose. rock on.

My main criticism for you was your idea of both sides of the fence. That's all really. I'm really not trying at all to be mean to you.

 

[mReEtTaIlRsEkD]

double post, that's fucking retarded

let's love it up