itt: evolution and trolling

[Summa]

explain this one to me because i dont understand the point, yes they lived a long time according to the bible, yet they are human, God is infinite, a day to God could be 1000-millions of years while a day for a human is literally 24 hours

you see now this is just baseless speculation much like your previous post, the thing @ the end of the previous post was valid but i didn't really see any backing for the rest. and you are just arguing a typical religious point of view "God is above us we cannot comprehend, he is outside of space/time/no constraints" well if he has no constraints then he doesn't exist and if you don't understand that you are a moron


Edit: no its not dank because this guy just got through telling us to take the bible literally, or are u gunna flipflop and say its hyperbole and metaphors now? we shall see, lets all flipflop about the book that is the "center of our faith" over the next 2000 yrs again! that works!

[DankNuggets]

you see now this is just baseless speculation much like your previous post, the thing @ the end of the previous post was valid but i didn't really see any backing for the rest. and you are just arguing a typical religious point of view "God is above us we cannot comprehend, he is outside of space/time/no constraints" well if he has no constraints then he doesn't exist and if you don't understand that you are a moron


Edit: no its not dank because this guy just got through telling us to take the bible literally, or are u gunna flipflop and say its hyperbole and metaphors now? we shall see, lets all flipflop about the book that is the "center of our faith" over the next 2000 yrs again! that works!

He is not a moron for not understanding god, you can't understand that which is beyond comprehension. Not everything is within comprehension, to deny this is moronic. To deny that something could exist that you can't comprend is moronic.

now to your edit directed at me: i don't care if he flip flops, he didn't write the book. if he wants to take some parts more literally than others, than it's his right. It's not a book, but a compilation of books written by different authors, so if he feels one may have exaggerated more than the other, you've got no room to deny him this. And the center of who's faith? It's not the center of my faith. It makes no more sense follow the science of 2000 yrs ago than it does to follow the literal interpretation 2000 years ago. That is to say, we can re evaluate the science of 2000 years ago and come up with new interpretations, just like we can re-evaluate our beliefs regarding creationism. And it's moronic to suggest that someone can't change their mind, or to say that by interpreting two different passages differently, he's contradicting himself. If he changes his mind on the SAME passage, then you've got more of a point, but even then cut him some slack for being more open minded.

[Summa]

He is not a moron for not understanding god, you can't understand that which is beyond comprehension. Not everything is within comprehension, to deny this is moronic. To deny that something could exist that you can't comprend is moronic.

now to your edit directed at me: i don't care if he flip flops, he didn't write the book. if he wants to take some parts more literally than others, than it's his right. It's not a book, but a compilation of books written by different authors, so if he feels one may have exaggerated more than the other, you've got no room to deny him this. And the center of who's faith? It's not the center of my faith. It makes no more sense follow the science of 2000 yrs ago than it does to follow the literal interpretation 2000 years ago. That is to say, we can re evaluate the science of 2000 years ago and come up with new interpretations, just like we can re-evaluate our beliefs regarding creationism. And it's moronic to suggest that someone can't change their mind, or to say that by interpreting two different passages differently, he's contradicting himself. If he changes his mind on the SAME passage, then you've got more of a point, but even then cut him some slack for being more open minded.

thank you for stuffing words in my mouth, i am not criticizing his beliefs in the slightest i am mocking the entire christian faith. an entire religion flipflopping is different from individual beliefs. i find it hard to trust in something that was so adamant about it being right a mere 300-500 yrs ago yet now took that all back and says that a bunch of it is hyperbole and metaphor. people can believe what they want, i'm just saying i'm not one to believe in such.

in regards to your first comment, i simply find it as a cop-out when one can't explain something that they fall back on "its a matter of faith" or "god is beyond our comprehension" or "god is limitless". and yet again something that knows no bounds and is bounded by nothing cannot exist anywhere because is disobeys the laws of existing, so dont say that your god is limitless or infinite or however you want to construe it. sure we may never be able to comprehend, but i'm not one to jump on board without tangible evidence

[the_paul]

There have been found dinosaur footprint fossils along with human footprint fossils next to each other from a very, very similar period in time. The two prints were made at almost the same point in time, so I'd imagine this find would put a pretty big dent in your theory of evolution as it relates to Intelligent Design.

[castromarx]

There have been found dinosaur footprint fossils along with human footprint fossils next to each other from a very, very similar period in time. The two prints were made at almost the same point in time, so I'd imagine this find would put a pretty big dent in your theory of evolution as it relates to Intelligent Design.

http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dino-fossils.htm

It's true.

[R1pp3r]

Oh yeah! The_Paul might be on to something here! What about the Loch ness monster?

[Epinephrine]

There have been found dinosaur footprint fossils along with human footprint fossils next to each other from a very, very similar period in time. The two prints were made at almost the same point in time, so I'd imagine this find would put a pretty big dent in your theory of evolution as it relates to Intelligent Design.

Even if this is true and I don't think it is, your logic is completely off base.

Disproving one thing does not make another true. You need to prove the other thing to prove it's true, and ID has never proved itself

[Money]

so much text, my eyes hurt

[the_paul]

The general consensus that I've seen in this thread is that 'not intelligent because of evolution.' Hence my reasoning. I really don't care either way, this thread isn't going to change anyones opinions, and its only a matter of time before it stoops to caps lock and name calling. I just thought it would be interesting to see the reactions.

[Kolar]

The general consensus that I've seen in this thread is that 'not intelligent design because it's not science.'

Fixed.

[Saturn V]

invoking godwin's law

creationism reminds me of hitler and the nazis

/thread

edit: oh wait.. am i too late? i'm not reading this cluster fuck to find out.

[Jeenyuss]

someone needs to make ignominy and i moderators for this forum

[Exalt]

ok i was drunk, edited this

[Displaced]

hold up...

Because I don't believe in god, I should kill myself right now for the betterment of humanity?

Take your god, your bullshit preaching, and shove it...

[Exalt]

...