Posts: 7155
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 11:05 am
(November 19, 2014 at 10:31 am)dyresand Wrote: 'Kind' is such a stupid term for simpletons.
why did OP try to say the world species is shaky its not
its the correct term. The Bible use of the term is too vague and (like so much of the Bible) easy to interpret in more than one way. It only says that Noah was instructed to bring two (or seven) of "each animal according to its kind." I wonder if it's not just as easy to assume that the original text read something like "take two/seven of all kinds of animals." Which would make far more sense and avoid the problem of how Noah got penguins and koalas onto the ark, though it simply kicks that particular can down the road.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 11:10 am
(November 19, 2014 at 11:05 am)Tonus Wrote: (November 19, 2014 at 10:31 am)dyresand Wrote: 'Kind' is such a stupid term for simpletons.
why did OP try to say the world species is shaky its not
its the correct term. The Bible use of the term is too vague and (like so much of the Bible) easy to interpret in more than one way. It only says that Noah was instructed to bring two (or seven) of "each animal according to its kind." I wonder if it's not just as easy to assume that the original text read something like "take two/seven of all kinds of animals." Which would make far more sense and avoid the problem of how Noah got penguins and koalas onto the ark, though it simply kicks that particular can down the road.
if theists want their bible to be relevant they need a NNT a new new testament and throw out the old garbage. Add science into it and nothing with magic or god in it.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 11:25 am
(This post was last modified: November 19, 2014 at 11:26 am by Cyberman.)
What I find amusing is if the bible had used the word "thing" or "macguffin" instead, creationists would be arguing over the scientific legitimacy of that.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 11:29 am
It all depends on whether the truth is something you arrive at or something you start from.
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 11:31 am
(November 19, 2014 at 11:10 am)dyresand Wrote: (November 19, 2014 at 11:05 am)Tonus Wrote: The Bible use of the term is too vague and (like so much of the Bible) easy to interpret in more than one way. It only says that Noah was instructed to bring two (or seven) of "each animal according to its kind." I wonder if it's not just as easy to assume that the original text read something like "take two/seven of all kinds of animals." Which would make far more sense and avoid the problem of how Noah got penguins and koalas onto the ark, though it simply kicks that particular can down the road.
if theists want their bible to be relevant they need a NNT a new new testament and throw out the old garbage. Add science into it and nothing with magic or god in it.
They need a post-new testament that contains just three words: "sorry about that"
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 11:36 am
(November 19, 2014 at 11:31 am)Chuck Wrote: (November 19, 2014 at 11:10 am)dyresand Wrote: if theists want their bible to be relevant they need a NNT a new new testament and throw out the old garbage. Add science into it and nothing with magic or god in it.
They need a post-new testament that contains just three words: "sorry about that"
sorry about that page one page 2 we just wanted to control you page 3 were so sorry for wasting your time page 4 science has answers this book does not page 5 why are you still reading this page 6. it shows a picture of a library card and physics books
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 23195
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 12:22 pm
(This post was last modified: November 19, 2014 at 12:25 pm by Thumpalumpacus.)
(November 18, 2014 at 10:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Context, people. I had already distinguished the difference between infinity/God in a qualitative sense and infinity/God in a quantitative sense. The kind of infinity that I've argued AGAINST was a quantitative sense, since we were discussing time/events in terms of amounts and duration.
Ah, so then there was a time when your god didn't exist?
(November 18, 2014 at 10:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Um, I've already identified my God with the four omni's...and along with immateriality and also identified in person as Jesus Christ. Don't know what more you want.
Perhaps start examining the contradictions between an omnimax god and claimed biblical qualities and behaviors.
(November 18, 2014 at 10:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Don't need to be dishonest when I am talking the truth. "I always tell the truth, even when I lie".
Nice soundbite ... and obvious dodge.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 12:28 pm
(This post was last modified: November 19, 2014 at 12:32 pm by robvalue.)
Here's a clip from the Atheist Experience, my favourite show, explaining why supernatural explanations are of no value at all. It's something I've always been trying to explain to people, and they put it better than I could.
If anyone says you can use your feelings to detect supernatural things then... I don't know how to end that sentence, but just don't do that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrWrwXl6t60
Posts: 23195
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 12:28 pm
(This post was last modified: November 19, 2014 at 12:29 pm by Thumpalumpacus.)
(November 18, 2014 at 10:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Looks.
And that's it? Nothing else?
(November 19, 2014 at 10:29 am)Chuck Wrote: How about whales? Fish kind?
Bats? Bird kind?
Well, that's what the Bible says.
Posts: 7045
Threads: 20
Joined: June 17, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: Atheism is unreasonable
November 19, 2014 at 12:30 pm
(November 19, 2014 at 12:28 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: (November 18, 2014 at 10:18 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Looks.
And that's it? Nothing else?
Pfft, if an animal's "kind" is classified by its 'looks', does that put me in the "Gorgeous Manly Man" kind?
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
|
