Creationism and Ignorance

[Edwardo Piet]

The differing definitions of evolution cause an equivocation problem. I accept evolution when defined as I did above, and the 50 writers in the book I linked presumably do as well.

True. But do you accept that different species evolve into one another and the whole "irreducible complexity" bullshit pushed by creationists is bunk?

If not, you are denying scientific facts.

[FatAndFaithless]

And...pointing to 50 writers only perpetuates the myth that there is some great divide in science of evolution being a fact. A divide that Alpha knows very well does not exist.

[John V]

And...pointing to 50 writers only perpetuates the myth that there is some great divide in science of evolution being a fact.  A divide that Alpha knows very well does not exist.

Yes, I know there's not a great divide. I wasn't responding to a claim about a great divide. I was responding to a claim about "some sort of disagreement."

[FatAndFaithless]

And...pointing to 50 writers only perpetuates the myth that there is some great divide in science of evolution being a fact.  A divide that Alpha knows very well does not exist.

Yes, I know there's not a great divide. I wasn't responding to a claim about a great divide. I was responding to a claim about "some sort of disagreement."

And there is "some sort of disagreement" among biblical scholars about the historicity of jesus - but I bet you'd call the hard mythicists a fringe group that isn't on respectable academic grounding.  It's even more lopsided when it comes to scientists and evolution.  You can find "some sort of disagreement" for the shape of the earth, as well.  "Some sort of disagreement" is about as flaccid a statement as someone could make.

[Angrboda]

And...pointing to 50 writers only perpetuates the myth that there is some great divide in science of evolution being a fact.  A divide that Alpha knows very well does not exist.

Yes, I know there's not a great divide. I wasn't responding to a claim about a great divide. I was responding to a claim about "some sort of disagreement."

Would you please quote what you are referring to here, as I haven't a fucking clue what you're talking about.

[John V]

What interests me at this point is why you, AM, who are able to speak intelligently around evolution nonetheless seek to promote young earth-ism.

While I accept YEC, I don't "seek to promote" it. Do you see me starting threads on it?

FWIW, I went to a public school that taught evolution. When I was first a Christian, I still accepted evolution. Now, I don't. I don't see convincing scientific evidence for evolution.

---

Yes, I know there's not a great divide. I wasn't responding to a claim about a great divide. I was responding to a claim about "some sort of disagreement."

Would you please quote what you are referring to here, as I haven't a fucking clue what you're talking about.

RTFT

[Edwardo Piet]

And...pointing to 50 writers only perpetuates the myth that there is some great divide in science of evolution being a fact.  A divide that Alpha knows very well does not exist.

Yes, I know there's not a great divide. I wasn't responding to a claim about a great divide. I was responding to a claim about "some sort of disagreement."

So what is the point in pointing out 50 scientists who who reject evolution when they're among the 2% and there are 2450 scientists who accept evolution?

[John V]

And there is "some sort of disagreement" among biblical scholars about the historicity of jesus - but I bet you'd call the hard mythicists a fringe group that isn't on respectable academic grounding.  It's even more lopsided when it comes to scientists and evolution.  You can find "some sort of disagreement" for the shape of the earth, as well.  "Some sort of disagreement" is about as flaccid a statement as someone could make.

Then it shouldn't have been made.

[Edwardo Piet]

And there is "some sort of disagreement" among biblical scholars about the historicity of jesus - but I bet you'd call the hard mythicists a fringe group that isn't on respectable academic grounding.  It's even more lopsided when it comes to scientists and evolution.  You can find "some sort of disagreement" for the shape of the earth, as well.  "Some sort of disagreement" is about as flaccid a statement as someone could make.

Then it shouldn't have been made.

There is no historical evidence whatsoever that the Jesus as described in the Bible ever actually existed.

Likewise with the claims of creationism. No evidence in favor of creationism whatsoever.

---

Surely by now with tens of thousands of Christian schisms, you're not surprised that Rule 34 has a counterpart in the religious world?  IOW, every conceivable belief exists somewhere in Christianity.   Christian Scientists have the balls to call themselves Christians just like scads of the rest of them.  No surprise there.  That Jesus failed to set up a proper and rigorous franchising and/or multi-level marketing plan for His religion is something the True® religious folks of this era are just going to have to live with.

Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. - Proverbs 3:5

Again, I'm only interested in what the scriptures say, not someones misguided belief of what they think the scriptures imply.

Find me anywhere in the bible where it states one is not to go to a doctor.

Luke 8
43 And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any,

44 Came behind him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched.

Why is this Jewish woman seeing doctors if it is forbidden?

And, does the following ring a bell?

. . . they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.


Believe it or not, it's in the Bible, and there are folks that take it absolutely seriously.   I believe they are called Literalists.  Perhaps you've heard of them ???

That scripture doesn't mean "don't go to a doctor"...

There are conditions that doctors cannot treat, as in the above scripture, therefore "they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

The Bible is the perfect document for bigoted assholes like you to cherry-pick.

You can find verses that support what you say and you can ignore all the verses that don't.

You're such a fucking moronic Christian that you aren't even capable of admitting the fact that the Bible is full of contradictions. Even sensible Christians will admit that if taken literally the Bible is full of contradictions. So, of course, they have to decide for themselves which parts are literal and which parts aren't. Find a contradiction? Oh that pat is metaphorical then.

The fact that you won't even admit that there are any contradictions in the Bible of all just goes to show what a fucking stupid fucker you are. But, of course, we already knew that.

You wanted me to present you with 1 contradiction in the Bible and I presented you with over 500.

[The Grand Nudger]

What interests me at this point is why you, AM, who are able to speak intelligently around evolution nonetheless seek to promote young earth-ism.

While I accept YEC, I don't "seek to promote" it. Do you see me starting threads on it?

FWIW, I went to a public school that taught evolution. When I was first a Christian, I still accepted evolution. Now, I don't. I don't see convincing scientific evidence for evolution.

YEC doesn't have an evolution problem, it has an everything problem.   I fail to see how you not believing in the facts of biology could conceivably lead to young earth cretinism.