Crazy things that Christians and Republicans believe

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

Ad hominems... not surprised.

Retarded posts....not surprised.

Calling peoples grandpa's monkeys like a 6-yr old would....not surprised.

 

[The Crow]

Then prove your assertion that these "fetuses" are in fact babies.

I'm still waiting for you to prove your original claim of atheist oppression....

Then prove your assertion that these "fetuses" are in fact babies.

I'm still waiting for you to prove your original claim of atheist oppression....

I said that labels are given to different stages of life. That doesn’t stop a person from being a person. Killing is killing. Abortion just happens to be the killing of a baby. Answer my questions and maybe I’ll answer yours. Btw, we can play Pete and repeat as long as you want. Aside from a break for work and sleep, we can keep this going as long as you want.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

I backed up my claims in earlier discussions, and you refused to read the information that was provided for you, even a PBS series made for kids, while dismissing it, like you did when others presented the information.

You defended plants coming before the sun. I dont think there is any piece of information that you are capable of interfacing with in an honest and cogent manner.

Hmm I'm pretty sure I've quoted one of your links at least 3 times. How could I have done this without reading it? Lie more?

Also your kids video re stated the claim. Where was the actual evidence provided?

God created light before the sun. Plants were fine

 

[hillelslovak87]

I said that labels are given to different stages of life. That doesn’t stop a person from being a person. Killing is killing. Abortion just happens to be the killing of a baby. Answer my questions and maybe I’ll answer yours. Btw, we can play Pete and repeat as long as you want. Aside from a break for work and sleep, we can keep this going as long as you want.

I'm not the one making positive claims. The burden of proof is upon you to prove your assertions.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

Retarded posts....not surprised.

Calling peoples grandpa's monkeys like a 6-yr old would....not surprised.

I didn't call anybody a monkey. Try to keep up. Evolution states that we are direct descendents of fish. You either believe this or you don't. It's foundational to the theory as it's currently stated. Strawmans don't win an argument

 

[franklinstower]

What anger? Is asking people to back up their claims tantamount to anger now?

I think you know that we agree on much of what you are presently discussing, all of it as it pertains to evolution. I am also not talking about the post I quoted, that was just a way to start up a conversation.

Just reading through the last few pages and really ALL of your posts on Christianity are dripping with anger and contempt and I just think that is very unhealthy.

Other than the fact that I know there is a God and you are sure there is not (correct me if that is wrong) I think we agree much of the time.

 

[hillelslovak87]

Hmm I'm pretty sure I've quoted one of your links at least 3 times. How could I have done this without reading it? Lie more?

Also your kids video re stated the claim. Where was the actual evidence provided?

God created light before the sun. Plants were fine

You read the first few paragraphs, and displayed that you did not read the entire paper, which lays out the proof for the larger claim, while disputing a smaller claim based upon a specific species between reptile and mammal classes.

The evidence was in the work provided in the links you refused to read. Once again, nobody can hand you a fossil through the computer or read for you.

Your last sentence proves you have no want of an honest discussion, considering plants photosynthesize from the sun.

 

[hillelslovak87]

I think you know that we agree on much of what you are presently discussing, all of it as it pertains to evolution. I am also not talking about the post I quoted, that was just a way to start up a conversation.

Just reading through the last few pages and really ALL of your posts on Christianity are dripping with anger and contempt and I just think that is very unhealthy.

Other than the fact that I know there is a God and you are sure there is not (correct me if that is wrong) I think we agree much of the time.

Where was my anger? When I was asking people to provide proof of their assertions, or where I pointed out how the bible has god killing babies all over the place, and it is contradictory for people to use that book in order to claim fetuses are babies, and that god wants them to be saved?

I dont know for sure there is no God. I am happy that there is zero evidence for any God, considering their character is that of someone no dignified human would ever aspire to.

 

[franklinstower]

Where was my anger? When I was asking people to provide proof of their assertions, or where I pointed out how the bible has god killing babies all over the place, and it is contradictory for people to use that book in order to claim fetuses are babies, and that god wants them to be saved?

I dont know for sure there is no God. I am happy that there is zero evidence for any God, considering their character is that of someone no dignified human would ever aspire to.

Not trying to change your beliefs but maybe just to soften them..... You seem to take the worst possible explanations about God, the Old Testament, really all of it and I wonder if you have just not ever been exposed to a more sophisticated understanding of the Bible and God and Jesus.

Maybe you have and like some atheists just choose to argue against the worst forms of it because you feel they are doing so much harm?

My exposure to Christianity was scholarly-- I am not a scholar-- but the person who instructed me was and it is just so different from what you say about it.

 

[The Crow]

I'm not the one making positive claims. The burden of proof is upon you to prove your assertions.

Wrong. And you refuse to answer my questions. Therefore you receive the same level of respect.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

You read the first few paragraphs, and displayed that you did not read the entire paper, which lays out the proof for the larger claim, while disputing a smaller claim based upon a specific species between reptile and mammal classes.

The evidence was in the work provided in the links you refused to read. Once again, nobody can hand you a fossil through the computer or read for you.

Your last sentence proves you have no want of an honest discussion, considering plants photosynthesize from the sun.

But a miraculous light created by the almighty God of the universe would be incapable of aiding in photosynthesis? Lawl.

So your paper starts out with, there is no proof of this, but then says there is proof later? Lie and BS more , it's cute. In case you forgot....

"It has not been convincingly confirmed
or disproved that the Osteolepiformes, a diverse but structurally
uniform group that is central to the debate about tetrapod
origins14–17, is monophyletic relative to tetrapods (that is, a
single side branch on the tetrapod lineage). The earliest steps of
the fish–tetrapod transition have thus remained poorly resolved"

I believe that was from the first paragraph of your first link.

 

[hillelslovak87]

But a miraculous light created by the almighty God of the universe would be incapable of aiding in photosynthesis? Lawl.

So your paper starts out with, there is no proof of this, but then says there is proof later? Lie and BS more , it's cute. In case you forgot....

"It has not been convincingly confirmed
or disproved that the Osteolepiformes, a diverse but structurally
uniform group that is central to the debate about tetrapod
origins14–17, is monophyletic relative to tetrapods (that is, a
single side branch on the tetrapod lineage). The earliest steps of
the fish–tetrapod transition have thus remained poorly resolved"

I believe that was from the first paragraph of your first link.

It's really odd to me that you think your first sentence is reasonable, and a valid defense of a clear error written by a bronze age writer. I mean.

You have proven that you are capable of reading one paragraph. Now read the rest of the paper and see your error.

 

[hillelslovak87]

Wrong. And you refuse to answer my questions. Therefore you receive the same level of respect.

The onus is on the one making the positive claims. I did not make this rule up. You can insult me all you want, that will not change the simple fact that you started this with a positive claim, and have steadfastly refused to defend or prove it.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

It's really odd to me that you think your first sentence is reasonable, and a valid defense of a clear error written by a bronze age writer. I mean.

You have proven that you are capable of reading one paragraph. Now read the rest of the paper and see your error.

If read from a neutral standpoint the Bible wasn't wrong at all about plants. Light came before plants, no big deal. It only becomes wrong when your biases lead you to believe the sun and stars are the origin of all light

I've since read all of your links. It didn't rectify the issue it admitted

 

[The Crow]

The onus is on the one making the positive claims. I did not make this rule up. You can insult me all you want, that will not change the simple fact that you started this with a positive claim, and have steadfastly refused to defend or prove it.

Insult you? You’re just repeating yourself over and over expecting a different result. Some call that insanity. You made some claims of a cockring of justice. Ive never heard of that device. Is it real or are you making things up that don’t exist because you’re mad and want to insult me?

 

[hillelslovak87]

Not trying to change your beliefs but maybe just to soften them..... You seem to take the worst possible explanations about God, the Old Testament, really all of it and I wonder if you have just not ever been exposed to a more sophisticated understanding of the Bible and God and Jesus.

Maybe you have and like some atheists just choose to argue against the worst forms of it because you feel they are doing so much harm?

My exposure to Christianity was scholarly-- I am not a scholar-- but the person who instructed me was and it is just so different from what you say about it.

Half of the bible present an extremely bloodthirsty and jealous God. I did not make this up. Christians avoid that God in favor of Jesus every day. If God tells people to bash babie's heads against rocks like he does in proverbs, God is evil. No riposte with "We cant judge God by our morals, because we cant understand him" will remedy these aspects of him, especially so considering he is routinely judged by human passions like anger, bloodlust and jealousy. He literally says his name is jealous.

 

[franklinstower]

Gotcha. Well, I think any path leading to God is a good one.

Something you said struck me. I have spent the last 23 years with my whole heart focused on Christ and getting closer to God. I run a small non profit Christian center where I pass on the kind of spirituality you find in John of the Cross and Teressa of Avila. It is my chosen path.

What you said though about defending the faith which is under attack in many ways had an impact on me. I dont do ANY of that, at least not directly. I dont like Christianity and even the notion of God disappearing. As you know it can bring so much power into peoples lives, so much transformation.

 

[hillelslovak87]

If read from a neutral standpoint the Bible wasn't wrong at all about plants. Light came before plants, no big deal. It only becomes wrong when your biases lead you to believe the sun and stars are the origin of all light

I've since read all of your links. It didn't rectify the issue it admitted

Our Earth was formed long after the sun. Since our Earth did not exist before the sun, plants could not have. Light did not exist before stars and the chemical reactions they utilize light.

It is dishonest to continue to defend things you know are not true.

I dont believe your last sentence, and I care not if you continue to call me fish boy and things like that. You are not offering anything to discuss rationally.

 

[hillelslovak87]

Insult you? You’re just repeating yourself over and over expecting a different result. Some call that insanity. You made some claims of a cockring of justice. Ive never heard of that device. Is it real or are you making things up that don’t exist because you’re mad and want to insult me?

Are you never going to actually address the positive claims you made? If not, dont even reply to this.....

 

[hillelslovak87]

If read from a neutral standpoint the Bible wasn't wrong at all about plants. Light came before plants, no big deal. It only becomes wrong when your biases lead you to believe the sun and stars are the origin of all light

I've since read all of your links. It didn't rectify the issue it admitted

Stars are the only source of light locally in our solar system, and the Earth came long after the star we call our sun. The bible has the earth being created before our sun, and plants before our sun.

This is absurd, and you continue to defend it. How is someone supposed to quarrel rationally with such beliefs?