Religion Discussion Topic

[LeonsBuddyDave]

This type of mindset is more or less the same as I had mentioned in my other post in this topic a few pages back. Missvalentine, I by no means wish to get into an argument by using you as an example (though I am no doubt tempting it) but it's this kind of faith that annoys me so much when it comes to religious discussion. I can appreciate faith when it has support and sound reasoning behind it, with opinions that are thought out and researched. I can not appreciate blind faith that is exactly that - blind, and unwilling to look in any direction but forward, especially when any evidence to the contrary of a set belief is presented.

In relation to the reliability of carbon dating that seems to be in question here, I found this article to be fairly informative: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-c14.html

[Sina]

Missvalentine, would you please stop writing these "explanations" about how things work when you're - under your own admission - completely uneducated and clueless on any of the subjects we're discussing? Never mind your unfathomable miscalculation concerning the age of the earth, but most people here even know more about Christianity than you do. Not only is your knowledge remarkably limited, but your attitude says that you're happy not knowing anything about anything.

You refuse to learn. You refuse to educate yourself. You refuse all these things since you fear actually learning something about the real world the rest of us live in might put the fragile existance of your christian god and the validity of the bible in question. It's the equivalent of covering your ears and shutting your eyes and screaming when confronted with an uncomfortable truth. The only knowledge you do seek is that written by likeminded individuals, cherry picking history, ignoring immense amounts of evidence and distorting facts for no other reason than to reaffirm their faith. Those articles you get your arguments from have nothing to do with facts. It's written by creationists to make other creationists feel good about being creationist. That's it. It's not accurate data.

Willful, blissful ignorance, denial and self delusion. Blind belief. It's just tragic, and why I hate all religon. It dumbs down society, which you've made painfully obvious in this topic. I'm actually depressed for the state of mankind after reading your posts, and it took me awhile to bring myself to actually write some form of response.

Concerning the age of the universe, though, let me ask you something... We know how fast light travels. I know you won't look into this, but just take my word for it. Now, the light from the moon takes about 1/3 of a second to reach us. It's that fast. Light from the nearest star, other than the sun, takes about 4,2 years to reach us, meaning it's 4,2 lightyears away.

However, since that star's light has to travel for 4,2 years to reach us, we're not actually seeing what the star currently looks like, only what it looked like 4,2 years ago. Like a glimpse into the past. If that star exploded today, it would take us here on earth 4,2 years to actually see the explosion. You understand?

Let's put this in perspective. The milky way galaxy is about 100 000 lightyears in diameter. Using telescopes, we can see stars and galaxies billions of lightyears away. Astronomers took a picture of a galaxy ~13 billion light years away. There are alot of newer stars and galaxies we can't see yet because their light hasn't reached us.

Now this is the tricky bit. For us to be able to see objects billions of lightyears away, their light must've actually traveled for billions of years. Meaning those distant stars and galaxies must've actually existed billions of years ago for us to be able to see them now.

If the creationist "theory" that the earth and universe is 6000-10000 years old was true, that would mean we would only be able to see stars 6000-10000 lightyears away. So how, in the name of fuck, do you explain seeing the light from a galaxy 13 billion light years away?

[LeonsBuddyDave]

<snip>

I agree with everything in this post.

[Bertha]

There was only ever one single worldwide flood Rosetta. And after that flood God said he would never flood the world again.

Why would there be more than one flood?

Lol...lol is all I can say to your refusual to listen. You live in Australia, correct? That's a place with animals that don't exist anywhere else in the world, and yet you claim that God flooded the entire planet and one man and his family were able to put every animal on one boat, and for over a month, they all lived peacefully. That means you're saying Noah managed to travel all the way to Australia, get two of all the animals there, keep them aboard boat, and then sail them back down there, along with every other animal that is native to only specific regions. Right. There was never a flood that covered the entire planet. What the entire world was to most people back in ancient times was a very, very tiny bit of land total to what actually existed. And as I said before which you clearly and utterly ignored: the Biblical flood is based on various stories from other floods that occurred in history.

And let's also talk more about your world ending great flood. Two of every living creature on earth would also consist of plants. Most plants cannot live submerged in water for too long. And let's also talk about genetics. Two of every species would not be able to sustain life. One such bottleneck to have existed, that we know of for sure, was when what we call dinosaurs began to die out and the new creatures able to live passed on their genes. There are more than likely many other said instances long before dinos, but humans have yet to develop science powerful enough to study so deep into the earth.

There was no world wide flood. Nothing would have survived except for fish and aquatic plantlife. It would have been impossible for something like that to happen less than 3000 years ago and for the world population to be at its current state today.


You keep going on about how they are your beliefs, and yet you refuse to give any credit to what others believe. You can't expect anyone to respect your opinions when you flat out refuse to do the same.

[Alexia_Ashford]

There's no need for me to post in this thread because Sina and Rosetta have pretty much summed up everything I'd say anyway. Missv, I understand it's your opinion, but before you make statements like you're doing, you really need to have evidence to back it up, not just make assumptions then keep hammering a point through and continually not backing it up. It really is like you're just covering your eyes, not reading anyone else's posts and just saying what you've already said before. It's frustrating :/.

[Ghostface]

I support Unitology 100% of the time when I forget I'm a catholic. But Atheists disgust me, if they don't believe in god then they can go to hell. Also saying Religion disgusts you really pisses me off. Religion didn't cause the world's condition right now, it's people saying our beliefs are gay and what we are doing in the name of our religion is wrong. Atheists are the problem not the believers.

[nemesiswontdie]

you saying that Atheist are the problem in this world pisses me off to. Religion IS part of the problem in this world the thing that makes this world go around is guess what? Religion and money. Just cause some people here (including me) dont believe in god you think that we are the problem cause we dont believe in what you believe in?

[LeonsBuddyDave]

But Atheists disgust me, if they don't believe in god then they can go to hell. Also saying Religion disgusts you really pisses me off. Religion didn't cause the world's condition right now, it's people saying our beliefs are gay and what we are doing in the name of our religion is wrong. Atheists are the problem not the believers.

Religious believers disgust me, if they believe in god then they can go to hell. Also saying atheism disgusts you really pisses me off. Atheism didn't cause the worlds condition right now, it's people saying our beliefs are gay and what we're doing in the name of our beliefs is wrong. Believers are the problem not the atheists.

See what it looks like turned around?

More blind faith and delusions of self-importance. Your boundless faith in "magic" does not, in fact, make you any better than me, nor does it give you any right to "damn" anybody because their opinions and beliefs don't quite match up with yours. It's this level of delusional close-mindedness and refusal to listen that started, carries on and will continue to create this world's problems - NOT those of us who question and try to rationalize the world around us.

[nemesiswontdie]

^ this

[Kronk]

I consider myself an Evolutionary Creationist. I believe God created the universe and everything within, and it has evolved acording to his plan.

I find it impossible to deny the existence of evolution, but I also find it ridiculous to believe that there was once nothing, nothing exploded and became something, and then two non-living elements bumped into each other in a pool of goo and became all life as we know it.

[missvalentine]

This post maybe slightly offensive so I apologize in advance.

Missvalentine, would you please stop writing these "explanations" about how things work when you're - under your own admission - completely uneducated and clueless on any of the subjects we're discussing? Never mind your unfathomable miscalculation concerning the age of the earth, but most people here even know more about Christianity than you do. Not only is your knowledge remarkably limited, but your attitude says that you're happy not knowing anything about anything.

Um.. where did I ever say that? I do study religion at school, but it doesn't interest me much though. Just like how I study maths and that also holds no interest for me. Also from what most of you are saying it seems like Taylor and I are the only people here who know jack shit about Christianity in this debate.

I didn't want to continue this topic, since no one here gets my point. But your posts are offensive and I'm gonna reply and defend my views.

You refuse to learn. You refuse to educate yourself. You refuse all these things since you fear actually learning something about the real world the rest of us live in might put the fragile existance of your christian god and the validity of the bible in question. It's the equivalent of covering your ears and shutting your eyes and screaming when confronted with an uncomfortable truth. The only knowledge you do seek is that written by likeminded individuals, cherry picking history, ignoring immense amounts of evidence and distorting facts for no other reason than to reaffirm their faith. Those articles you get your arguments from have nothing to do with facts. It's written by creationists to make other creationists feel good about being creationist. That's it. It's not accurate data.

All the "proof" you guys are giving us are from biases sources which are biased against creationism. So that's no real proof at all. That's just crazed evolutionist ramblings. Honestly when I read stuff like that it just makes me laugh with disbelief of how anyone could be so gullible and stupid to believe such nonsense.

I studied science in school, and it just made me appreciate all the stuff God made for us even more. It just felt like more proof God existed to me. All the beauty and wonder in the world could not possibly have come from nothing. I believe there must of been a creator and that it was God.

Willful, blissful ignorance, denial and self delusion. Blind belief. It's just tragic, and why I hate all religon. It dumbs down society, which you've made painfully obvious in this topic. I'm actually depressed for the state of mankind after reading your posts, and it took me awhile to bring myself to actually write some form of response.

Same thing when I read your posts Sina.

I think it would be so depressing believing evolution. Believing that when you died, that was it. That you would never see dead loved one again. That were nothing special and just randomly formed by chance. Believing that there is no one that cares or loves us. No higher power. How depressing, what a sad existence you have. I'm glad I have my beliefs, it makes me so much happier and makes things more optimistic. While for evolutionists, things are pessimistic, I mean, what is the point of life if your just a descendant of an ape? Why are you there? There is no point in life in your beliefs. Religion makes things so much more worthwhile and meaningful.

Concerning the age of the universe, though, let me ask you something... We know how fast light travels. I know you won't look into this, but just take my word for it. Now, the light from the moon takes about 1/3 of a second to reach us. It's that fast. Light from the nearest star, other than the sun, takes about 4,2 years to reach us, meaning it's 4,2 lightyears away.

However, since that star's light has to travel for 4,2 years to reach us, we're not actually seeing what the star currently looks like, only what it looked like 4,2 years ago. Like a glimpse into the past. If that star exploded today, it would take us here on earth 4,2 years to actually see the explosion. You understand?

Let's put this in perspective. The milky way galaxy is about 100 000 lightyears in diameter. Using telescopes, we can see stars and galaxies billions of lightyears away. Astronomers took a picture of a galaxy ~13 billion light years away. There are alot of newer stars and galaxies we can't see yet because their light hasn't reached us.

Now this is the tricky bit. For us to be able to see objects billions of lightyears away, their light must've actually traveled for billions of years. Meaning those distant stars and galaxies must've actually existed billions of years ago for us to be able to see them now.

If the creationist "theory" that the earth and universe is 6000-10000 years old was true, that would mean we would only be able to see stars 6000-10000 lightyears away. So how, in the name of fuck, do you explain seeing the light from a galaxy 13 billion light years away?

Quite simply, the light was created already more than half way to earth. I mean, it's not that hard to imagine, if God made the earth, he can speed up light for a bit don't you think. he can you know, do anything.

Lol...lol is all I can say to your refusual to listen. You live in Australia, correct? That's a place with animals that don't exist anywhere else in the world, and yet you claim that God flooded the entire planet and one man and his family were able to put every animal on one boat, and for over a month, they all lived peacefully. That means you're saying Noah managed to travel all the way to Australia, get two of all the animals there, keep them aboard boat, and then sail them back down there, along with every other animal that is native to only specific regions. Right. There was never a flood that covered the entire planet. What the entire world was to most people back in ancient times was a very, very tiny bit of land total to what actually existed. And as I said before which you clearly and utterly ignored: the Biblical flood is based on various stories from other floods that occurred in history.

Well Rosetta, if there was a worldwide flood, then the continents we have now were not there before the flood happened obviously. Since you know, the water would push and shift everything around. It was likely that there could have been one huge land mass, and after the flood it broke apart to form what he have today. There is evidence after all that the top of Australia was connected to the bottom of Asia a long time ago if you do your research.

So your animal thing has no point if every animal lived in the same place at one point.

And let's also talk more about your world ending great flood. Two of every living creature on earth would also consist of plants. Most plants cannot live submerged in water for too long. And let's also talk about genetics. Two of every species would not be able to sustain life. One such bottleneck to have existed, that we know of for sure, was when what we call dinosaurs began to die out and the new creatures able to live passed on their genes. There are more than likely many other said instances long before dinos, but humans have yet to develop science powerful enough to study so deep into the earth.

So, having only two of every creature on earth, it would be impossible to sustain life.

Yet having none of every creature on earth, mud could somehow turn into humans eventually?

I love your logic.

There was no world wide flood. Nothing would have survived except for fish and aquatic plantlife. It would have been impossible for something like that to happen less than 3000 years ago and for the world population to be at its current state today.

Yet you think it possible that nothing exploded into something?

3000 years is a looooooooooooooooong time Rosetta.

You keep going on about how they are your beliefs, and yet you refuse to give any credit to what others believe. You can't expect anyone to respect your opinions when you flat out refuse to do the same.

If i remember correctly, I did show respect, and respectfully debated them with Darkmoon, until Sina and you came along and called me a moron for being religious.

[Darkmoon]

Um.. where did I ever say that? I do study religion at school, but it doesn't interest me much though. Just like how I study maths and that also holds no interest for me. Also from what most of you are saying it seems like Taylor and I are the only people here who know jack shit about Christianity in this debate.

Yeah...I think we can safely guarantee that I very likely know more about Christanity than you do. I certainly know more about it in history and, most importantly, how it has been changed over the years. Simply not sharing your opinion doesn't change my knowledge on the subject.

All the "proof" you guys are giving us are from biases sources which are biased against creationism. So that's no real proof at all. That's just crazed evolutionist ramblings. Honestly when I read stuff like that it just makes me laugh with disbelief of how anyone could be so gullible and stupid to believe such nonsense.

Nope. I'm sorry, but...Darwin himself was Christian and tried to fit the theory of evoloution into God's plan. A lot fo scientists from various religions, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc, have double checked findings or done them from scratch. The information is not biased. As far as anyone can tell it is accurate stuff.

Again, remember, you aren't working off God's word. It was a best guess. Not God. The vast majority of scientists agree on this, regardless of religious background. There are some that disagree...but if you look into msny of them they tend to either fundementalists with a bought for degree or someone who received large donations in funding from someone who wants a certain result. As much as it sickens me it happens in science.

I studied science in school, and it just made me appreciate all the stuff God made for us even more. It just felt like more proof God existed to me. All the beauty and wonder in the world could not possibly have come from nothing. I believe there must of been a creator and that it was God.

Yeah, the biggest flaw in the idea of the Big Bang is it just happened. We can be relatively certain it did happen, but that it just randomly started from nothing is a pretty big stretch

That doesn't make evoloution or the big bang theory wrong, of course, just that we don't have the full explanation. One idea is that God started the Big Bang.

Same thing when I read your posts Sina.

I think it would be so depressing believing evolution. Believing that when you died, that was it. That you would never see dead loved one again. That were nothing special and just randomly formed by chance. Believing that there is no one that cares or loves us. No higher power. How depressing, what a sad existence you have. I'm glad I have my beliefs, it makes me so much happier and makes things more optimistic. While for evolutionists, things are pessimistic, I mean, what is the point of life if your just a descendant of an ape? Why are you there? There is no point in life in your beliefs. Religion makes things so much more worthwhile and meaningful.

...you're working on a theory that everyone who thinks evolution happened thinks God isn't. That's very, very wrong. There have been several people in this thread alone that have said the exact opposite, myself included. God and evoloution are not mutually exclusive. Even believing in the Bible doesn't stop this. They can work together, although some people think it's blasphemy...on both sides of the fence, amusingly.

Quite simply, the light was created already more than half way to earth. I mean, it's not that hard to imagine, if God made the earth, he can speed up light for a bit don't you think. he can you know, do anything.

He can...but why would he? There are a million other things to test someone faith. The world has yet to be saved. There are horrible, horrible things happening, things that God could stop by thinking about it. He doesn't need to mess with light to make people question there faith, why else would he do something like that?

Everything can be answered by, 'Well, God can...' But we know God doesn't want that. We're supposed to think, we're supposed to come to conclusions, we're supposed to look at evidence. He wants us to find the answers, that He wants us to find a better understanding of him without it being simply told to us.

The, 'Well, God can...' reasoning is one of the few things we know God doesn't want. We're supposed to explore this world, this unverse like curious children, not assume we have the answer already.

Well Rosetta, if there was a worldwide flood, then the continents we have now were not there before the flood happened obviously. Since you know, the water would push and shift everything around. It was likely that there could have been one huge land mass, and after the flood it broke apart to form what he have today. There is evidence after all that the top of Australia was connected to the bottom of Asia a long time ago if you do your research.

So your animal thing has no point if every animal lived in the same place at one point.

Water couldn't force that kind of tectonic shift...not without ripping the curst of the planet into fragments that would, in turn, destroy the planet. Tectonic shift, of course, does explain it...but is an explanation many Christians won't believe because it's not in the Bible. Which is wierd because we can actually measure that one physically, see the tectonic plates moving along.

Of course, every animal did live in one place at one point...Pangea, the proto super continent. It's why all life in evoloution is connected and all life shares a number of the same building blocks. They have changed and evolved to suit the locations as the thing split up into different areas.

However, Noah's Flood likely happened, if not on a Global scale. The best guess is it occured when the mediteranian was flooded by the ending of the last ice age. There is evidence of several floods in a number of locations at roughly the same period. The world may not have ended but it was a massive series of calamaties.

So, having only two of every creature on earth, it would be impossible to sustain life.

Yet having none of every creature on earth, mud could somehow turn into humans eventually?

I love your logic.

...the logic is sound. Again, you're assuming evoloution and God are mutually exclusive. They aren't.

Genetically speaking, two of each animal would have been genetically impossible to sustain a population. They'd have died out to mutation due to a lack of fresh genetic code. See why incest is a problem.

Of course, there weren't two of every animal. There were seven of every clean animal and two of every unclean animal. Gasp. I know, the song is wrong. But you can all go read for yourselves on that one.

Which leads us to several other problems...one, the continents were in there current location. Noah could not have gotten every animal on earth. Not without a ship, and we know he built that afterwards.

The there is the size of the Ark required for this project...first, you need a tank capable of holding all the fish in the world. The mixing of salt and fresh water would kill fish. Then you need to house the animals, Noah, his sons and there wives. Then you need food and fodder for all these people and anaimal.

In other words, unless God performed a miracle (and there is nothing to suggest he did) the Ark would need to be roughly the size of North America. I think you can see the problem here. For one, a ship that big would need a hull about 50 feet thick to stop it snapping under it's own weight...which it would likely do anyway.

The Bible can't be taken literally. It doesn't work. More likely Noah survived a smaller flood, with as many animals as he could take into his Ark.

Yet you think it possible that nothing exploded into something?

3000 years is a looooooooooooooooong time Rosetta.

No, not really. Archaologically speaking it's pretty short, albeit it action packed. We have information, writings and evidence of human life from well, well before that...heck, before 6000 too...

...which, need I remind you, was a best guess. I think SelfishGene explains the details earlier.

If i remember correctly, I did show respect, and respectfully debated them with Darkmoon, until Sina and you came along and called me a moron for being religious.

In fairness, you haven't been all that polite yourself. You have enfered that essentially anyone non-Christian is wrong, even though you yourself are clearly unaware of exactly what the Bible says. You've insulted quite a lot of people with your views on Paganism and your complete lack of any desire to learn. You refuse to learn about your religion, or anyone elses, and yet you have these very dramatic views that you're completely unwilling to change.

It's wound a lot of people up, and even if you haven't been directly rude to anyone yet you've come awfully close on more than one occasion. A lot of people here know a lot about these subjects, and simply ignoring them or telling them they're wrong without any real reason or evidence to back you up. The 6000 year old earth theory being a good one. There isn't a jot of evidence for it beyond what is mentioned earlier, counting who begat who and such, and a metric ton of it against. So you have a best guess against hard, hard evidence. God never said it, it's not in the Bible, and so it's not something that you need to hold faith with.

[Bertha]

Well Rosetta, if there was a worldwide flood, then the continents we have now were not there before the flood happened obviously. Since you know, the water would push and shift everything around. It was likely that there could have been one huge land mass, and after the flood it broke apart to form what he have today. There is evidence after all that the top of Australia was connected to the bottom of Asia a long time ago if you do your research.

Um...the first part of your argument makes no sense at all. And yes...I am familiar with the theory that all the contients were connected at one point. It was called Pangea. And the idea behind it would go against your point entirely, because in order for the Earth's plates to shift in such a manner, it would take millions of years. So basically, you just killed your own argument.

So your animal thing has no point if every animal lived in the same place at one point.

Again...you really failed to comprehend what was said. The animals simply wouldn't say "Oh...I'm going to just hang out on this patch of land for a while guys, and wait as the land masses slowly drift away from each other." The animals exist in a way that they do because of a little thing called evolution.

So, having only two of every creature on earth, it would be impossible to sustain life.

Yet having none of every creature on earth, mud could somehow turn into humans eventually?

I love your logic.

Learn yourself some science kid. Bacteria and other one celled organisms exist in water. The first plants and animals, algea and jelly fish for example, aren't exactly animals and plants. As volcanos form land masses, things wash up on shore. They slowly start to evolve in order to adapt to their habitat. That's a very rough break down of it, but yes...that is how life forms. Just look at the Hawaiian islands for example. New life grows on their surfaces because of the evolving habitats.

And kid...I think my logic is a bit more sound than yours. I'm taking into account time, genetics, and more than blind faith. If you want to try to act like a smartass, try a better way to go about it.

Yet you think it possible that nothing exploded into something?

3000 years is a looooooooooooooooong time Rosetta.

3000 years is a long time ago, but recorded history dates back even longer, and if your theory about Pangea being true in Biblical times, people would have written about it. People in the early 1000s hardly knew North and South America existed at all, and yet there were already people living there.

If i remember correctly, I did show respect, and respectfully debated them with Darkmoon, until Sina and you came along and called me a moron for being religious.

Well, I'm a Christian but i don't really like really like Christians who Bible bash people or think there better than you, they piss me off. And i hate Christians which are overly obsessed with rituals or going to church.I really hate Religion even though I'm a Christian.

I never called you a moron. I said you were judgemental and needed to sort out fact from fiction. You are also a bit of a hypocrite, since in your earlier posts you claim to NOT be religious, but suddenly have changed your mind.


See what I mean? Now it sounds like you're just arguing in effort to try and get someone in trouble.

[JcFFx]

So I'm going to clarify my earlier post right now:

I'm Agnostic theist; I believe in some sort of power created something from nothing. I don't believe in any specific diety of sort.

But moving on. Something about Christianity always seems to hit a nerve for me. Maybe it's because I've been in a Catholic school for 8 years of my life, be it elementary or high school (NOT the stereotyped "being taught with nuns that hit you with rulers" Catholic schools).
I dunno, I'm sure if, Ceteris Paribus, I grew up in another region of the world I would've thought the same about that region's religion and found Christianity as fascinating as I do with other religions now. But alas...

Either way, I started skimming through this topic outta boredom. I usually try to avoid these topics because it gives me incentive to break out of my "try respecting those with religious beliefs" ideology (boredom is a heartless bitch). But some sore spots have been hit, so...

(Actually, now that I've cooled down a bit while typing, I'm going to try going back to previously said ideology and have removed a rather lengthy bit of what was essentially me lashing out at the Bible.)

While for evolutionists, things are pessimistic,

Pope John Paul has expressed his views that Evolution can be compatible with Christianity.
Catholicism is still Christianity. You're not Catholic, but the core beliefs are still the same

I mean, what is the point of life if your just a descendant of an ape?

I'm... actually not following this.
It's essentially asking "what is the point of your current life based on what an ancestor you don't know or likely care about was".

Reworded, I might as well be saying "what's the point of my life if I'm just the descendent of a random Chinese person who was most likely a peasant?"

"What's the point of life" is really a philosophical question, but either way I don't tie it with a distant descendent. I don't give a crap on what my family was a couple hundred years ago, let alone 2000 years ago and let alone X billion years, and I certainly don't use it as a deciding factor on 'how much is my life worth?'

You're also implying that religions who believe in reincarnation are also "depressed and pessimistic and therefore anyone who believes in your God ultimately is oh so much happier." Your elitism continues to amaze me.

Why are you there?

Well, what's your answer from a more religious Christian perspective?

From my understanding, your life is essentially a lengthy test that boils down to whether or not a god (who unconditionally loves you) will sentence you to pain and suffering for eternity.
Actually there is barely a point in life in that case, because what ultimately matters is death.

Of course the test being "live a life of doing good" sounds good on paper. The flaw is, "Good and bad", vary depending on cultures, beliefs, time, etc.
In the same sense that there is a commandment saying not to kill yet early passages of the bible tells people to be sentenced to death for a lot of things. Not to mention how Capital Punishment is a debatable issue.
That whole thing with female circumcision? I won't say I approve of it, but there is a motive behind it that would be considered "good".
There's a couple of passages in Exodus that actually implies that it's perfectly fine to sell your daughters as slaves (or servants, or as a wife, either way it boils down to "selling your daughter"), in so much as that they give "guidelines" for it. Whether or not that's "good" depends on the person.

So no, I don't see how Christianity somehow gives a better answer. The "answer" they give is incredibly vague.

Yet having none of every creature on earth, mud could somehow turn into humans eventually?

Evolution doesn't argue how life began, it argues how we became what we are now. That's abiogenesis you're thinking of.

[Member_of_STARS]

This post maybe slightly offensive so I apologize in advance.

Its not offensive. But it is outrageous, its absolutely shocking and just jaw dropping in the ammount of ignorance youve been able to cram into your "arguments".

Um.. where did I ever say that? I do study religion at school, but it doesn't interest me much though.

If you have no clue about your own religion, how can you argue with atheists who know more about your god than you do, and still claim you have more knowledge on the subject? You do understand that faith based on "feelings" and "emotions" and ignoring everything else just to make yourself feel happy is exactly whats wrong with you? You ask for evidence, yet you have never, not once provided anyone here with any solid arguments nor evidence. All you have is "hai guiz, i belive in god so im right".

You then say science is flawed and biased, yet you take scientific facts and historical observations to prove your own godawful retarded ideas! See also: your arguments on world wide flood and the movement of continents.

Just like how I study maths and that also holds no interest for me.

Willful ignorance and taking pride in ones stupidity? How can you take a superior position in an argument with anyone?

Also from what most of you are saying it seems like Taylor and I are the only people here who know jack shit about Christianity in this debate.

Taylor looks to have at least some common sense and she knew when she was beat. Considering that youre still around and youre actually being serious in using "God did it!" arguments against cold, hard, foolproof scientific facts. Thats just sad. Its also extremely insulting.

I guess if God didnt want you to study in school, hell plan a great future for you based on faith and your great social skills alone?

I didn't want to continue this topic, since no one here gets my point. But your posts are offensive and I'm gonna reply and defend my views.

Oh lord... We get your point. We also have a very negative opinion formed about you, based on your points and which arguments you use to defend your religion.

All the "proof" you guys are giving us are from biases sources which are biased against creationism. So that's no real proof at all. That's just crazed evolutionist ramblings. Honestly when I read stuff like that it just makes me laugh with disbelief of how anyone could be so gullible and stupid to believe such nonsense.

Which ones, and please go into detail on how they are wrong and why. Why are they ramblings? (have you actually READ a biology book?)

You call us gullible and stupid because we strive to learn new things and make an effort to understand this world? All the while you choose to sit on your ass, never open a textbook, never open your mind and just choose to think that God made everything and that you dont need anything else?

See the pattern? Deeply religious people who dish science = usually with a below-average IQ, no tolerance, ignorant and proud about it, lazy and usually insecure. And note, you can actually influence your IQ through mental preparation, studies and excercise.

Just so you wouldnt ignore this. Id like some proof next time you present your BS.

I studied science in school, and it just made me appreciate all the stuff God made for us even more. It just felt like more proof God existed to me. All the beauty and wonder in the world could not possibly have come from nothing. I believe there must of been a creator and that it was God.

Then you never paid any attention in school or your science teacher is a donk. I advise you to take the courses to some depth and study your "science" more. Either you covered the whole Earth in 5 days or your teacher was secretly a catholic priest on a hunt.

Same thing when I read your posts Sina.

There is no doubt, by anyone, which posts are better all around. Yours just dont compare. Hes bringing in some of the best arguments Ive seen that are supposed to make you THINK and they are all based on our current knowledge, cold, hard proof and historical observations and you ignore everything with a "lulz, god made light travel faster argument"?

Seriously. The worst response ever. Youve also ignored Darkmoons argument about icecore samples. And you admitted to believeing (because it made youf eel good) that humans and dinosaurs lived together. I really advise you to watch Jurassic Park again to see just how well that would have gone for the humans. If anything, some fiction should at least push you to think in the right direction.

I think it would be so depressing believing evolution.

And so in order to live a "happier" life you just lie to yourself and hold your chin up? And then say we are stupid? Well played, sir. You totally got every atheist there. It has nothing to do with being depressed or not.

Believing that when you died, that was it. That you would never see dead loved one again. That were nothing special and just randomly formed by chance.

Yeah. Thats totally what this life is about. Remember, ignorance also breeds selfimportance.

Believing that there is no one that cares or loves us. No higher power. How depressing, what a sad existence you have. I'm glad I have my beliefs, it makes me so much happier and makes things more optimistic. While for evolutionists, things are pessimistic, I mean, what is the point of life if your just a descendant of an ape? Why are you there? There is no point in life in your beliefs. Religion makes things so much more worthwhile and meaningful.

You think were depressed? Just because we dont believe in an afterlife? Ignorant, arrogant and blissful. We dont live in a fairytale, youre right about that. We observe the world, learn from it and will not ignore the worst parts of it. But saying an atheist is unhappy just because he doesnt believe in a story about a white bearded man who changes the speed of light if he wants to, and saddles people on dinosaurs... No. I dont need that to be happy. Id settle for "much less".

Quite simply, the light was created already more than half way to earth. I mean, it's not that hard to imagine, if God made the earth, he can speed up light for a bit don't you think. he can you know, do anything.

Quite simply, youre wrong and I would like to see some proof to this well educated opinion and well formulated theory of yours.

Well Rosetta, if there was a worldwide flood, then the continents we have now were not there before the flood happened obviously. Since you know, the water would push and shift everything around. It was likely that there could have been one huge land mass, and after the flood it broke apart to form what he have today. There is evidence after all that the top of Australia was connected to the bottom of Asia a long time ago if you do your research.

Theres no evidence in the bible about any landmasses moving around. And you say science is biased. So why are you using scientifically proven phenomenons and process´ to prove your point? Do you understand that there wouldnt be enough water to actually submerge that huge landmass? You could have easily just said "God made a giant wave and dinos went to surfing, lol" and be done with it. Why make an effort and use science now?

Heres why. You really dont know jackshit. But youve heard bits and pieces of something over the years and one of them was the changed positions of the continents. So now youre taking something "youve heard of" to "prove" something "you believe is right".

Makes sense.

So, having only two of every creature on earth, it would be impossible to sustain life.

Correct. The proof is in the genetic state of European royalty in the past. Their offspring suffered from pretty serious illnesses. And as you can imagine, if most of the European royalty suffered from hereditary genetic diseases and the genepool of royal Europe wasnt only 2 people, but much more- what would happen with only two people?

Once again. Proof is staring you right in your face. Ever thought where all these stereotypes about "rednecks" come from?

Yet having none of every creature on earth, mud could somehow turn into humans eventually?

You dont even realize that noone ever claimed that this is how it happened. This argument is just silly.

Yet you think it possible that nothing exploded into something?

3000 years is a looooooooooooooooong time Rosetta.

So youre saying the world repopulated from 2 out of every species and is at its current right state today? Make a quick calculation on ALL of the world species and how big of a boat you would need.

Indeed, I do love how you ignore logic.

If i remember correctly, I did show respect, and respectfully debated them with Darkmoon, until Sina and you came along and called me a moron for being religious.

People are not calling you a moron for being religious. Quit being so arrogant. People are calling you a moron because of how you present your arguments and how you ignore what you see and believe in what you "feel". Your whole case is built on lack of knowledge and being proud of it.