Evolution and Christianity and Salvation

[The Grand Nudger]

...lol...but not before informing the batshit religious that their fairy tales ARE TOO! scientific. 

[Drich]

If not the Jesus Seminar and other scholars like them, whom should I trust?  You??

How dense are you? did you not read or was it you did not understand what I pointed out about the Jesus seminar? The short answer was the scholars vote counted for nothing, they where there only to feign legitmacy for slow minded people who did not seek any more truth thn 50 scholars voted and came to a consensus.. Again their votes mean nothing because 100+ average people also had a 1:1 vote meaning their vote counted as much as the scholars vote counted.

So again if a hundred regular people where ask is homosexuality evil and the bible say they should be stoned to death, how many regular people would think that to be immoral and vote what they think is moral despite what the bible says?

When you give 2twice the number regular people the same weight as a specialist then the specialists vote mean nothing. If this group wanted a real accurate interpretation of the bible regular people would not have twice the say as someone who has spent their lives in study.

here's the part I don't understand what you don't get when it comes to me reconciling my thoughts with proper reference material.. as I AM THE ONLY ONE who cites reference material when I make new or hard to accept points. meaning I am the only one who puts my own work behind scholars and what they have done and said via my constant quotations and citing of other works. 

It is beyond honest reasoning to accuse me of not researching my topics and or conclusions.

I dare you to challenge anything I have said from now back to my first post, and I will be able if i have not already provide some point of reference (something an expert has said at some point) which not only supports what my conclusions are, but often times fully support my thoughts scripturally

[The Grand Nudger]

You make a dare that has already been satisfied.   It not possible to be more batshit crazy....than that.

You're daring people to stand on a line that they're already standing on.  WTF is wrong with you, and how did whatever that is happen?

[Jehanne]

If not the Jesus Seminar and other scholars like them, whom should I trust?  You??

How dense are you? did you not read or was it you did not understand what I pointed out about the Jesus seminar? The short answer was the scholars vote counted for nothing, they where there only to feign legitmacy for slow minded people who did not seek any more truth thn 50 scholars voted and came to a consensus.. Again their votes mean nothing because 100+ average people also had a 1:1 vote meaning their vote counted as much as the scholars vote counted.

So again if a hundred regular people where ask is homosexuality evil and the bible say they should be stoned to death, how many regular people would think that to be immoral and vote what they think is moral despite what the bible says?

When you give 2twice the number regular people the same weight as a specialist then the specialists vote mean nothing. If this group wanted a real accurate interpretation of the bible regular people would not have twice the say as someone who has spent their lives in study.

here's the part I don't understand what you don't get when it comes to me reconciling my thoughts with proper reference material.. as I AM THE ONLY ONE who cites reference material when I make new or hard to accept points. meaning I am the only one who puts my own work behind scholars and what they have done and said via my constant quotations and citing of other works. 

It is beyond honest reasoning to accuse me of not researching my topics and or conclusions.

I dare you to challenge anything I have said from now back to my first post, and I will be able if i have not already provide some point of reference (something an expert has said at some point) which not only supports what my conclusions are, but often times fully support my thoughts scripturally

Show us your curriculum vitae; what degrees do you have, and from where?  And, what have you published and where?

[Drich]

You make a dare that has already been satisfied.   It not possible to be more batshit crazy....than that.

You're daring people to stand on a line that they're already standing on.  WTF is wrong with you, and how did whatever that is happen?

where has it been satisfied? matter of fact are you not supposed to be finding examples of me lying? so which is it? this is not a game douche you are boarding slander here. am I a liar or am I crazy? show me an example of either, or are you just a simple minded troll! As that is all you've become. You have habitually failed to over turn any of my points biblical positions or arguments, so now like every other lazy intellect, you attack me personally like a poor man's john stewart but with the funny or any stated examples.

---

How dense are you? did you not read or was it you did not understand what I pointed out about the Jesus seminar? The short answer was the scholars vote counted for nothing, they where there only to feign legitmacy for slow minded people who did not seek any more truth thn 50 scholars voted and came to a consensus.. Again their votes mean nothing because 100+ average people also had a 1:1 vote meaning their vote counted as much as the scholars vote counted.

So again if a hundred regular people where ask is homosexuality evil and the bible say they should be stoned to death, how many regular people would think that to be immoral and vote what they think is moral despite what the bible says?

When you give 2twice the number regular people the same weight as a specialist then the specialists vote mean nothing. If this group wanted a real accurate interpretation of the bible regular people would not have twice the say as someone who has spent their lives in study.

here's the part I don't understand what you don't get when it comes to me reconciling my thoughts with proper reference material.. as I AM THE ONLY ONE who cites reference material when I make new or hard to accept points. meaning I am the only one who puts my own work behind scholars and what they have done and said via my constant quotations and citing of other works. 

It is beyond honest reasoning to accuse me of not researching my topics and or conclusions.

I dare you to challenge anything I have said from now back to my first post, and I will be able if i have not already provide some point of reference (something an expert has said at some point) which not only supports what my conclusions are, but often times fully support my thoughts scripturally

Show us your curriculum vitae; what degrees do you have, and from where?  And, what have you published and where?

what a simpleton.. Do I need to explain to you how reference material works??? When I quote another or leave their work or alink to their work it is not my education nor ablity that is in question. My role in this is but to sum up and present the work of other 'smarter men' in such a way that you all can not only understand it but phrase and produce it in such away as to illicit a response.. In a sense I am but a conduit putting a person before often times indisputable fact. now if you question the fact or youwant to argue the facts then you address the person who I have often time quoted.

[Jehanne]

Show us your curriculum vitae; what degrees do you have, and from where?  And, what have you published and where?

what a simpleton.. Do I need to explain to you how reference material works??? When I quote another or leave their work or alink to their work it is not my education nor ablity that is in question. My role in this is but to sum up and present the work of other 'smarter men' in such a way that you all can not only understand it but phrase and produce it in such away as to illicit a response.. In a sense I am but a conduit putting a person before often times indisputable fact. now if you question the fact or youwant to argue the facts then you address the person who I have often time quoted.

Your views are NOT the views of modern scholarship.

[The Grand Nudger]

You make a dare that has already been satisfied.   It not possible to be more batshit crazy....than that.

You're daring people to stand on a line that they're already standing on.  WTF is wrong with you, and how did whatever that is happen?

where has it been satisfied? matter of fact are you not supposed to be finding examples of me lying? so which is it? this is not a game douche you are boarding slander here. am I a liar or am I crazy? show me an example of either, or are you just a simple minded troll! As that is all you've become. You have habitually failed to over turn any of my points biblical positions or arguments, so now like every other lazy intellect, you attack me personally like a poor man's john stewart but with the funny or any stated examples.

So....no explanation for that?

[Peebothuhlu]

(O_o)

'Referance material'?

 

Links through to movies such as 'God's not dead' and.... geeze it'd take an hour or so to trawl back and dredge up some of the other 'Pop-sci' (At best) bits of stuff you've so called 'Reffered' to on this thread Drich.

Heck, the most honest thing I think you've posted was that testimonial.

Though we all understand the inherant bias that such personal testimonials inherantly have, hence why science doesn't use them.

Drich.

You keep being bat-sheet you Drich.

[Jehanne]

what a simpleton.. Do I need to explain to you how reference material works??? When I quote another or leave their work or alink to their work it is not my education nor ablity that is in question. My role in this is but to sum up and present the work of other 'smarter men' in such a way that you all can not only understand it but phrase and produce it in such away as to illicit a response.. In a sense I am but a conduit putting a person before often times indisputable fact. now if you question the fact or youwant to argue the facts then you address the person who I have often time quoted.

No "smarter men" (or, women, for that matter), agree with you.  If so, name one, and we'll discuss that person's credentials.

[Drich]

what a simpleton.. Do I need to explain to you how reference material works??? When I quote another or leave their work or alink to their work it is not my education nor ablity that is in question. My role in this is but to sum up and present the work of other 'smarter men' in such a way that you all can not only understand it but phrase and produce it in such away as to illicit a response.. In a sense I am but a conduit putting a person before often times indisputable fact. now if you question the fact or youwant to argue the facts then you address the person who I have often time quoted.

Your views are NOT the views of modern scholarship.

Again NOT MY VIEWS RETARD! They represent a different section of MODERN SCHOLARSHIP. or are you so stupid to not understand 'science' is not in 100% agreement with it self? There are multiple theories on everything with as much sometimes more research behind it. for instance global warming is a late 80s sky is falling problem who was coined originally when nixon was president. Before that? 500 years of weather research that pointed to solar output along with orbital displacement (our relative position to the sun based on the fact we do not have a semitrical trajetory around the sun. we orbit more like a hula hoop around the sun and less like a bike wheel on an centralized axel. meaning when our orbit put us closer to the sun and when and if the sun is max output (as sun energy cycles) our planet warms and cools. Again! 500 years of this type of theory, and we get 20 years of the sky is falling unless we tax the countries and their people who have factories and cars! Next thing you know you all are bending over to pay you carbon tax. 

Understand the point is not what you believe or which version you even like, the point is science is not always with in 100% agreement with it self, and what I do is bring up the counter point to popular BS like the sky is falling global warming and show you it take faith to believe in a 30 year history of the sky is falling verse 500 years of recorded data. Again don't make this about what or why you believe, but understand the point that you ultimatly choose by faith that your scientists with 30 years of work are right and 500 years of collected data is wrong. it is the faith in choosing that I bring to the surface not who is right and who is wrong.

You people are so use to being polarized you can not even discuss a subject beyond the who is right and who is wrong as being the only means of discussion.. If you had the mind you could step the conversation up a knotch and look at the point I am making. In that I don't care what you believe but the choice you made even if you where unaware of the other theories at the time. If I can make you aware of other theories and you remain it is because of the faith you have in your specific brand of science. that said that little bit of faith you have before your brand of science floods you with everything you need to convert that faith to absolute belief is the same measure of faith God requires to do for you what he has done for me.