“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#508965 Jun 11, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
it's becoming obvious what type of "evidence" that you're inclined to embrace....
Evidence that I can see or test myself. I know, it's a high standard, luckily science has the same standard so I do get a lot of evidence to look at and study. Working on the evidence for evolutionary biology right now, it's pretty fascinating.

As for biblical evidence, the only such evidence that supports it are for the mundane and inconsequential events in the bible, nothing more has ever been provided. Even then, some of the mundane claims are lacking in any evidence, such as the flood or the travel to through the desert, we have never even found one bit of evidence showing Jews in Egypt.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#508966 Jun 11, 2012
YELLODOG wrote:
<quoted text>
I look stupid? really? YOU don't even seem to understand the definition of EVOLUTION.
open a dictionary.
EVOLUTION is the changing of one SPCIES to a totally different species.
not mutation.
if one EVOLVES that means they change into something 'beyond' what they were.
greater than.
mutation IS not evolution.
scientists will tell you that much.
you atheist believe that LIFE orignated from NON-life.
that is impossible.
why do you think evolution is the religion of atheism?
DUH......because it excludes God.
no one in their right mind can believe that everything came from nothing.
that life is UNplanned, UNpurposed, random, and everything was an accident from 'magical' chemicals in a pool of mud.
which spawned over 20 million species.thats nuts.
This statement:
"EVOLUTION is the changing of one SPCIES to a totally different species."

- is correct - dinosaurs to birds.

Now to think this occurred over only a small amount of time, as in 6000 years, is not factual. Implying it did, is also not factual.

The "evolution" of just these two species, had occurred over millions of years.

Evolution of man, more than likely is still occuring. One character that has evolved is our ability to cogninantly think, whereas many millenia or thousands of years ago, wer didn't have this capability.

When so-called "Christians" want to characterize evolution iwthin a certain box, they actually fall short of a having the complete information required to place it into that small box.

If one also puts down the Bible, and pick-up a Science book for these matters, that is where you will find accurate information.

Not speculative theories or unfounded claims, as you have above.
BlockandTackle

North Vernon, IN

#508967 Jun 11, 2012
http://www.enkispeaks.com/Essays/14EnkiThothN... Please carefully read this as it pertains to Genesis and Pre-Genesis Sumerian writings .

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#508968 Jun 11, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
i think that i have access to the very mind of Christ, which incidently does NOT agree with the 'gospel of go-thomas'!
"Thinking" you do, and actually you have - are two different things.

Of course it doesn't, because you have been indoctrinated for so long, it does require a investigation. This would mean, you would have to step out of the reigiouos box and investigate being unbiased, in which you seem to not be.

That there is the problem, you just think you have no control in changing it.

You do.
BlockandTackle

North Vernon, IN

#508969 Jun 11, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Evidence that I can see or test myself. I know, it's a high standard, luckily science has the same standard so I do get a lot of evidence to look at and study. Working on the evidence for evolutionary biology right now, it's pretty fascinating.
As for biblical evidence, the only such evidence that supports it are for the mundane and inconsequential events in the bible, nothing more has ever been provided. Even then, some of the mundane claims are lacking in any evidence, such as the flood or the travel to through the desert, we have never even found one bit of evidence showing Jews in Egypt.
hmmm , try looking up Hyksos , NOT Jews . Jews are merely the offspring of the tribe of Judah .

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#508970 Jun 11, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't want to be you.
Why not?

I'm a great guy to be.
BlockandTackle

North Vernon, IN

#508971 Jun 11, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
i don't agree with any person or religion that doesn't follow Christ. Christ said "My kingdom is not of this world". YOUR boy hitler believed completly the opposite....
Really , then what of the religion of Abram ?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#508973 Jun 11, 2012
Mike Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have time to read 400,000 comments by a-holes.
Spooty old math stuff.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#508974 Jun 11, 2012
BlockandTackle wrote:
<quoted text>hmmm , try looking up Hyksos , NOT Jews . Jews are merely the offspring of the tribe of Judah .
That's stretching evidence to support a claim. The bible says Jews, therefore there would need to be evidence of Jews in Egypt to support it, there is none.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#508975 Jun 11, 2012
Mike Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have time to read 400,000 comments by a-holes. But here is my comment to you. I bet you that when you are on your deathbed, that you pray to God to save your miserable soul.
Nope. I'd say "I hope I'm wrong, but if not, please resurrect me as a robot someday, I want to see the future."

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#508977 Jun 11, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
So I am guessing that after 508,903 posts, nobody has been able to prove there's a God, yet.
This thread isn't about proving anything.
Common Sense

Ottawa, Canada

#508980 Jun 11, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
i don't agree with any person or religion that doesn't follow Christ. Christ said "My kingdom is not of this world". YOUR boy hitler believed completly the opposite....
And whatever your beliefs are, they are not shared by all Christians. If they were there would not be so many christian sects.
Common Sense

Ottawa, Canada

#508982 Jun 11, 2012
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
This statement:
"EVOLUTION is the changing of one SPCIES to a totally different species."
- is correct - dinosaurs to birds.
Now to think this occurred over only a small amount of time, as in 6000 years, is not factual. Implying it did, is also not factual.
The "evolution" of just these two species, had occurred over millions of years.
Evolution of man, more than likely is still occuring. One character that has evolved is our ability to cogninantly think, whereas many millenia or thousands of years ago, wer didn't have this capability.
When so-called "Christians" want to characterize evolution iwthin a certain box, they actually fall short of a having the complete information required to place it into that small box.
If one also puts down the Bible, and pick-up a Science book for these matters, that is where you will find accurate information.
Not speculative theories or unfounded claims, as you have above.
Here is a definition of evolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
Wikipedia wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution is any change across successive generations in the inherited characteristics of biological populations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.
BlockandTackle

North Vernon, IN

#508984 Jun 11, 2012
Genesis 1:29 . every seed-bearing plant and treeis to be your food . Genesis 2: 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you must not eat . Strange these two messages so entirely contradict themselves . Genesis chapter 2 also retells the creation of man story . Why ? Perhaps therewas a second creation of man after the original ? Genesis chapter 2:5 Implies the reason for mans' existence is to " till the soil " . 2:18 tells of the creation of another person , to be a " helper " . Perhaps these first people were intended to be slaves to till the earth of its gold ? It is possible that the bible writers were trying to convey a message that they were created by beings not from the planet earth but from afar off . If we were to travel to Mercury and live , we would live to be the equivalent of 400 years old .( 88 earth days equals to 1 Mercury solar year ). The bible tells of beings from another planet coming to earth and servicing the "human" women , producing strange offspring , monsters and giants to name two . If travellers came to earth from beyond our planet it is conceivable that they would live much longer on earth than their home planet . The bible tells of Methuselah living to be about 1,000 earth years old . Maybe he did . Maybe his remains was taken back to his home planet . The one(s) who "created" us are our god(s), but certainly they were in turn "created" by another unknown god or chance . I can believe in the above , but refuse to believe in the way the bible is taught today . The churches and all religions each portray the bible as something different .

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#508986 Jun 11, 2012
Sir Doctor 3 wrote:
<quoted text>No, there is no evidence for what you say, only speculation. Don't take your argument and try to assume upon others as fact. 5'9" and 150 pounds is very unmanly. I must ask, do you have feminine hormone issues? Your body mass, suggests low testosterone. Just asking, because I do not see the relevance in your sharing personal physical attributes of yourself. Colon, which suggests colon cancer, also not relevant to discussion.
We are going to bump heads on this.

That size is about the universal average for men. In fact 5'9" and 160 is about the optimal size for men as far as strength and endurance. I myself was 5' 8' and 140 in my younger years, and I was strong enough to throw you, fast enough to kill you before you knew it happened, and have a dick long enough your wife would pack your bags for you.

Please refrain from using such criteria for judging manliness.
Stupid Things YD Say

Ottawa, Canada

#508987 Jun 11, 2012
YELLODOG wrote:
<quoted text>
I look stupid? really? YOU don't even seem to understand the definition of EVOLUTION.
open a dictionary.
EVOLUTION is the changing of one SPCIES to a totally different species.
not mutation.
if one EVOLVES that means they change into something 'beyond' what they were.
greater than.
mutation IS not evolution.
scientists will tell you that much.
you atheist believe that LIFE orignated from NON-life.
that is impossible.
why do you think evolution is the religion of atheism?
DUH......because it excludes God.
no one in their right mind can believe that everything came from nothing.
that life is UNplanned, UNpurposed, random, and everything was an accident from 'magical' chemicals in a pool of mud.
which spawned over 20 million species.thats nuts.
Really really stupid stuff wrote:
<quoted text>
I look stupid? really? YOU don't even seem to understand the definition of EVOLUTION.
open a dictionary.
EVOLUTION is the changing of one SPCIES to a totally different species.
Please refrain from using your daffy definition of evolution.

Why don't you do what you say?

Go ahead and open a dictionary!
BlockandTackle

North Vernon, IN

#508991 Jun 11, 2012
jude 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate , but left their own habitation ...

“The eye has it...”

Since: Jan 12

Russell's teapot.

#508993 Jun 11, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
Damage to the meat sends spurious signals to the processor of the brain. A strictly material consciousness will quickly become disorganized. Coherency will quickly turn into randomness. But there is a core of rather high level thought observing the effects.
Those "explanations" you gave are rationalizations that don't fit material reality. They really don't get into the nuts and bolts.
Your emotions cloud your perceptions. You jump to conclusions on how I, and others, think.
Not enough space left to enlighten you on that. Perhaps later to day. Keep in mind I said I had developed a technician's religion.
The above is nothing but your opinion, and it is contradicted by the data that's been accumulated concerning NDE's.

Some people have them. Some people don't. Some people have similar experiences. Some have radically different experiences.

No matter the experience, it's almost always marked by a uneventful, outwardly, state(pretty motionless).

The variances inwardly, that people do return, and relate, seem calm no matter what the experience is, whether it's one like your alter-dimensional story. Or one with no phenomena at all.

Where do you arrive at the conclusion that it must be as you say, based upon your experience, when other experiences differ?

What evidence do you have that supports an entirely "material/brain" based consciousness requires internal mayhem at death?
BlockandTackle

North Vernon, IN

#508994 Jun 11, 2012
Sir Doctor 3 wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, your confusion is yours. Any group can call it self Christian, but not all are. Christian means with Christ and Christ within, so if they are not born-again they are not Christians. All Christians share the exact same belief, the Bible is the inerrant word of God from beginning to end, Jesus is Lord, you must come to God through Christ and you must be born again.
Can a Hindu call himself a Muslim? No. Can a Muslim call herself a Jew? No. Can any one who picks up a Bible call themselves a Christian? No.
Actually the Vatican has a monoploy on the word christian . All christians are catholic . Many Protestants ( those who peruse the king James Version) unwittingly lay claim to being a christian though they are not. As for being a Jew , that is a bloodline NOT a religion , and to be a Jew , your mother must be a Jew . That is why president Barack O'Bama is technically "white" , NOT negro . As for a Hindu ? well , that can mean a person who was born in Hindustan , again NOT a religion . A Jew CAN most certainly be a follower of the Quh'ran .
Lily the aborter

United States

#508995 Jun 11, 2012
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
We are going to bump heads on this.
That size is about the universal average for men. In fact 5'9" and 160 is about the optimal size for men as far as strength and endurance. I myself was 5' 8' and 140 in my younger years, and I was strong enough to throw you, fast enough to kill you before you knew it happened, and have a dick long enough your wife would pack your bags for you.
Please refrain from using such criteria for judging manliness.
Manny Pacquaio is 5'6" 1/2 and his just fought at the heaviest weight he's ever been (147 pounds). Manny could kick the snot out of "Doctor" with one arm and blindfolded. Size means NOTHING.
"Doctor" is probaby one of those tall, fat, goofy guys that thinks he's all tough because he is big. More like fat. Fat doesn't make one 'manly'. What a DA.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 9 min Liam 554,822
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 14 min THE SOUND OF THE ... 119,221
Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says (Jun '07) 17 min scirocco 37,636
Documentary Sphere 20 min Documentary Sphere 1
Good news from Apple 24 min marine crul 2
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 26 min waaasssuuup 603,594
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 29 min Remnant of 144000 39,152
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 2 hr WildWeirdWillie 175,036
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr Rick in Kansas 263,421
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 5 hr maikel 177

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE