Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature. I will,i read about it in school. Go here and read of irefutable proof of evolution. I am still looking for the big toe texts.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html Look, I read all of them a long time ago. Actually I read them as most of them were originally posted. I was reading talk.origins in 1993. Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,….
Yes, miracles are supposed to be supernatural. If they are natural phenomena, then science can investigate. But perhaps you can outline a plan for how science could investigate supernatural things. but so did cave men when they saw lightning,
And they were wrong right?
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature. I will,i read about it in school. Go here and read of irefutable proof of evolution. I am still looking for the big toe texts. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html Look, I read all of them a long time ago. Actually I read them as most of them were originally posted. I was reading talk.origins in 1993. So you know evolution is real.Hypocrite.How can you believe in evolution and creation? Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,…. Yes, miracles are supposed to be supernatural. If they are natural phenomena, then science can investigate. But perhaps you can outline a plan for how science could investigate supernatural things. but so did cave men when they saw lightning, And they were wrong right? Something is only supernatural until science explains it as natural.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one.Religion can prove NOTHING.Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain YET,much as lightning once was. The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.). The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man. The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability. The thrust of the second party is to trust God and take Him at His Word.
I can’t believe you all haven’t plonked this moron by now. I admit, it is fun to smack the retardedly lobbed softballs IDontKnowSHit repeatedly offers, but after a while it starts to seem like some lobotomized loon who keeps calling your house. Eventually you have to look at your caller ID and not answer.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature. I will,i read about it in school. 20 years ago,I’m no kid. Ahhh, that explains a lot. Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,but so did cave men when they saw lightning,science took care of that.Someday science WILL investigate.Religion will be disproven,again. Whoosh, and nary a hair on his head was touched. You did not answer my question. Please try and do that. I did answer your question.Therein lay the problem.You’re so hell bent on
calling miracles supernatural that you can’t be open to the possibility that they are what lightning was 2,000 years ago-natural events as yet unexplained. You are still a hippocrite,I didn’t hear you denying that dumbass.I tell
you one thing,I’m a hell of a lot smarter than you.The fact that you believe in religion tells me that.
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word.
Only a pea brain would swallow that! These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions.
Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence. [Richard Dawkins] The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.). The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man.
The whole idiotic premise has been disproven time and time again, you nitwit. When we are borne we cry that we are come To this great age of fools [William Shakespeare] The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability.
No it is truth and honesty instead of pathetic superstition. The thrust of the second party is to trust God and take Him at His Word.
Yes – the only trouble is the god you refer to and the thousands of other gods, have never said a single word to anybody so far!!!! Bob Humanist atheist Brit. Hong kong "There are two things in the world that can never get together- religion & common sense." [George W. Foote]
Response:
Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion.
No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature. Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science.
Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed
literature.I will,i read about it in school. Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,but so did cave men when they saw
lightning,science took care of that.Someday science WILL investigate.Religion will be disproven,again. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I can’t believe you all haven’t plonked this moron by now. I admit, it is fun to smack the retardedly lobbed softballs IDontKnowSHit repeatedly offers, but after a while it starts to seem like some lobotomized loon who keeps calling your house. Eventually you have to look at your caller ID and not answer. If you leave him unanswered, the innocent will be taken in by his lies. He’s not posting his crap for us, he’s posting it to lure unwary newcomers. ## Science has proof without certainty,in the eyes of the Religious-the proof is certain. ## Creationism a false sense of certainty with NO proof.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousan years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republicanwill become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has notbeen measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could bewrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature. I will,i read about it in school. Ahhh, that explains a lot. 20 years ago, I’m no kid. Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition*cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,but so did cave men when they saw lightning,science took care of that.Someday science WILL investigate.Religion will be disproven,again. Whoosh, and nary a hair on his head was touched. You did not answer my question. Please try and do that. I did answer your question.Therein lay the problem.You’re so hell bent on calling miracles supernatural that you can’t be open to the possibility that they are what lightning was 2,000 years ago-natural events as yet unexplained.
What you seem to be so hell bent on doing is not reading or thinking before you answer. If science investigates an event it is a *natural* event. It is not a supernatural event. You said that man thought lightening was supernatural, but lightening is not and never has been supernatural. It is perfectly natural. Thus science can investigate it. Science cannot e.g., investigate the number of feathers on an angel’s wing. You are still a hippocrite,I didn’t hear you denying that dumbass.I tell you one thing,I’m a hell of a lot smarter than you.The fact that you believe in religion tells me that.
Well, gee I guess you told me.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousandyears Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature. I will,i read about it in school. Go here and read of irefutable proof of evolution. I am still looking for the big toe texts. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html Look, I read all of them a long time ago. Actually I read them as most of them were originally posted. I was reading talk.origins in 1993. So you know evolution is real.Hypocrite.How can you believe in evolution and creation? Why not? Ah,because creation says God created Man,Evolution all life evolved from
the primordial soup.You are just like Bush to try anfd toe the line between the two.Take a stand! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them. Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,…. Yes, miracles are supposed to be supernatural. If they are natural phenomena, then science can investigate. But perhaps you can outline a plan for how science could investigate supernatural things. OK-Give me an example of something you call supernatural-that actually
happened(So that doesn’t include the resurrection nonsense)and I will. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – but so did cave men when they saw lightning, And they were wrong right? Something is only supernatural until science explains it as natural. Then it *wasn’t supernatural* then was it?
Response:
God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word. No, God hasn’t said any such thing. Genesis 1.
That’s man’s writing. And a rather ignorant, superstitious man at that! God, if he exists, knows the order in which he made things, and the Genesis 1 order is wrong in several respects. ## Shall God govern by the laws of nature, ## or priests by fictitious miracles? John Adams
Response:
I can’t believe you all haven’t plonked this moron by now. I admit, it is fun to smack the retardedly lobbed softballs IDontKnowSHit repeatedly offers, but after a while it starts to seem like some lobotomized loon who keeps calling your house. Eventually you have to look at your caller ID and not answer.
If you leave him unanswered, the innocent will be taken in by his lies. He’s not posting his crap for us, he’s posting it to lure unwary newcomers. ## Science has proof without certainty, ## Creationism certainty without proof.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousandyears Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature. I will,i read about it in school. Go here and read of irefutable proof of evolution. I am still looking for the big toe texts. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html Look, I read all of them a long time ago. Actually I read them as most of them were originally posted. I was reading talk.origins in 1993. So you know evolution is real.Hypocrite.How can you believe in evolution and creation?
Why not? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them. Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,…. Yes, miracles are supposed to be supernatural. If they are natural phenomena, then science can investigate. But perhaps you can outline a plan for how science could investigate supernatural things. but so did cave men when they saw lightning, And they were wrong right? Something is only supernatural until science explains it as natural.
Then it *wasn’t supernatural* then was it?
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word.
No, MEN say that God says that these things happened by special miracles that completely defy natural law. The same MEN don’t seem to understand that a god who writes the truth in a book and the performs miracles to cover it up is a duplicitous spirit that should be exorcised, not worshipped. Thank GOD this god is only a creature of the imaginations of MEN. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions.
The second one is false. God never said what you say He said. The universe’s actual beginning is beyond our view, but the last 13 or so billion years of its existence are not. The history of the earth is written in stone, which is more than I can say for your fantasies about your false god. You claim to worship the God of the Bible, but clearly you do not. Instead, you worship a god you made up, using parts of the Bible taken wholly out of context (both historical and textual context) in order to invent a reflection of your own disordered ego. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.).
This is simply libel. And, being libel, it is a direct violation of God’s commandments. So much for the theory that you actually worship the God who said "thou shalt not bear false witness." The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man.
No you don’t. You use the Bible all right, but you use it to justify your sins of false witness and blasphemy. You attribute the words of man to God and forget to obey the actual words of God. The words that MAN, including YOU, have put in God’s mouth have turned out time and again to be false words. It’s time you repented your sins and actually learned to follow Jesus Christ instead of trying to use His name in vain as a bludgeon to force you disordered will on others. The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability.
That’s your game, son. You have been denying God with just about every post you make in here about science. The thrust of the second party is to trust God and take Him at His Word.
That’s my game. God is NOT a deceiver. The universe tells us about how it was constructed. Your myth is a nice, ancient story about it but was never intended as a literal history. The only way to know God, son, is to actually KNOW Him. Not know the Bible’s words, but know the God who inspired them. If you do that, He will inspire you and you will no longer need a book and interpreters to tell you how to behave (which you are doing badly, by the bye). It is not that God does not do special miracles. He does them more often than men give Him the credit. But He is not a magician. He is a creator and He has created a universe that runs under laws that He ordained and those laws cause past events to leave evidence behind them. — Dave Oldridge+ ICQ 1800667 A false witness is worse than no witness at all.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature. I will,i read about it in school.
Ahhh, that explains a lot. Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,but so did cave men when they saw lightning,science took care of that.Someday science WILL investigate.Religion will be disproven,again.
Whoosh, and nary a hair on his head was touched. You did not answer my question. Please try and do that.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. No. You are wrong. This is not a fact. Every human in the world has not been measured for any little toe research that I know of, but I could be wrong. Please supply full bibliographic references to the peer-reviewed literature.I will,i read about it in school. Go here and read of irefutable proof of evolution.I am still looking for
the big toe texts.http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. Tell me, how does science investigate something which by definition *cannot* be investigated? Science deals only in natural phenomena. Miracles are *supernatural* and therefore cannot be investigated. You call them supernatural,but so did cave men when they saw lightning,science took care of that.Someday science WILL investigate.Religion will be disproven,again.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Scientists CAN prove…. Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. Evidence religion doesn’t have the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one. Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. It’s FACT that the Human little toe is smaller with each generatrion. Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain…. Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. Science can and will investigate them.Who the fuck are you to say what
science can investigate?You just don’t eant miracles to become science. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – YET,much as lightning once was.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word. No, God hasn’t said any such thing. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Read what IKnowHim claims to be the Word of God, the Bible. See the errors in it. Find the lies and the fabulous fabricated miracles and the phony prophecies and bogus history. Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions. Another way is to observe the lies told by frauds like IKnowHim. The sentence above makes a good example. Pure unadulterated bullshit told by a persistent liar. Such things as the evolution of species and the birth of stars and solar systems are observable and have been observed. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false IKnowHim is so abysmally ignorant of science he is hardly the person to be pontificating about what has and has not been proven. The second party uses the Bible, The work of unknown ancient goatherders. God’s Word So he claims but can’t prove. with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Which discription includes a round flat earth with a solid dome of sky over it.
Some even think it has 5 corners… http://www.flat-earth.org/ Hilarious. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man. True, since God hasn’t said anything! What the Bible says on the other hand is easily disproven in many instances. The thrust of the first party is to deny God No folks! Don’t let him sell you that one. Science denies IKnowHim’s god, the Bible, not any actual Creator there might be. The thrust of the second party is to trust God and take Him at His Word. No, your efforts are to get folks to trust IKnowHim and take him at his lying word! ## Pia mendacia fraude
Response:
Scientists CAN prove….
Science doesn’t prove anything. It provides evidence. Proofs are for mathematics. the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one.
Doubtful. This’d be like claiming that in 1,000 years a Republican will become president of the United Nations. There is no way to do it. Religion can prove NOTHING. Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain….
Supernatural miracles are by definition something that science cannot investigate. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -YET,much as lightning once was.
Response:
Scientists CAN prove the big bang occured,They heard the echo.They CAN prove evolution,just look at your little toe and know that in a thousand years Humans won’t have one.Religion can prove NOTHING.Miracles are merely events that science cannot explain YET,much as lightning once was.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.). The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man. The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability. The thrust of the second party is to trust God and take Him at His Word.
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word.
I know you seemingly cannot read that bible of yours, but just for grins, please explain the first few words of Genesis 1:11; 1:20 and 1:24.
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word.
No, the bible says is came about that way. Isn’t this a form of false witness?? Do you speak to God? These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions.
One does not need to create a universe nor be present for it’s creation to understand it. The only thing that needs to be observable, verifiable and reproducible are the experiments that are performed upon the evidence presented. I know people have corrected you on this matter. But I am not surprised you weren’t listening. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.). The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man. The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability. The thrust of the second party is to trust God and take Him at His Word.
You are so full of shit. Science is not against god you moron. If anything it is trying to explain god’s creation for how it actually came into existence. Science would have just as much to prove there is a god as proving their isn’t. There is no great underground conspiracy to destroy religion except in your fevered mind. Your beliefs are based on nothing but faith. Faith that god exists and faith that he is a writer. Faith that the bible is inspired by god and faith that every translation, edit and modifictaion maintained the original meaning. Faith that the bible should be interpreted literally and faith that all was truly witnessed. Faith that nothing was added or removed, faith that your pastors and priests have not lied to you. You have nothing but faith. You have no proof, no evidence no substance to your empty claims. Your beliefs will fail EVERY time in conflict with science. — Read the Bible, because the world needs more atheists.
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.). The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man. The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability. The thrust of the second party is to trust God and take Him at His Word.
Response:
These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false.
Classic false dichotomy. Congratulations. — Mike "No thanks, I’m just looking."
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word.
No, God hasn’t said any such thing. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which?
Read what IKnowHim claims to be the Word of God, the Bible. See the errors in it. Find the lies and the fabulous fabricated miracles and the phony prophecies and bogus history. Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions.
Another way is to observe the lies told by frauds like IKnowHim. The sentence above makes a good example. Pure unadulterated bullshit told by a persistent liar. Such things as the evolution of species and the birth of stars and solar systems are observable and have been observed. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false
IKnowHim is so abysmally ignorant of science he is hardly the person to be pontificating about what has and has not been proven. The second party uses the Bible,
The work of unknown ancient goatherders. God’s Word
So he claims but can’t prove. with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us.
Which discription includes a round flat earth with a solid dome of sky over it. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man.
True, since God hasn’t said anything! What the Bible says on the other hand is easily disproven in many instances. The thrust of the first party is to deny God
No folks! Don’t let him sell you that one. Science denies IKnowHim’s god, the Bible, not any actual Creator there might be. The thrust of the second party is to trust God and take Him at His Word.
No, your efforts are to get folks to trust IKnowHim and take him at his lying word! ## Pia mendacia fraude
Response:
(snip) Among all the ancient peoples, only the Hebrews got their cosmology right.
Boggle. (snip) Like every cause, the Cause of the universe must be independent of its effect.
Ever hear of "feedback". Sheest!
Response:
The Miracles of God
What can we learn from this century’s greatest astronomical discoveries? What the Message from Space is Telling Us About God By Fred Heeren for Searchlight Publications, Revised Edition, April 2000. The following summary is reproduced from the book, Show Me God. Copyright was waived so as to allow this text to be disseminated to interested parties. The Bible and the Message from Space: What can we learn from this century’s greatest astronomical discoveries? Discovery 1 – 1919: During a solar eclipse, Sir Arthur Eddington observed the bending of starlight passing the Sun, matching the effect predicted by Einstein’s general theory of relativity. If correct, this theory of gravity means that the universe must be expanding. Einstein eventually renounced his belief in an eternal universe and admitted that the universe must have had a beginning. Astrophysicist George Smoot says: "Until the late 1910’s, humans were as ignorant of cosmic origins as they had ever been. Those who didn’t take Genesis literally had no reason to believe there had been a beginning." Discovery 2 – 1927: Astronomer Edwin Hubble discovered that the galaxies are all retreating from us. The more distant galaxies (which show us the more distant past) are retreating from us faster than the nearer galaxies, just as one would expect if the universal expansion is slowing down from an initial surge. Famed astronomer Robert Jastrow says: "The Hubble Law is one of the great discoveries in science: it is one of the main supports of the scientific story of Genesis." Discovery 3 – 1965: Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered cosmic background radiation coming from every point in the sky, the remnant predicted by early big bang theorists. Its precise matching with a blackbody spectrum at all frequencies is difficult to reconcile with anything other than a creation event involving the entire universe. Discovery 4 – 1970s: Astronomers observe that galaxies are distributed more densely – and quasars become abundant – as they look farther into space, indicating that the universe has change with time. These observations argue against an eternal cosmos and for a creation event. Discovery 5 – 1992: NASA’s COBE satellite team discovered the predicted ripples in the cosmic background radiation. George Smoot, the team’s leader, called these seeds for future galaxy superclusters "fingerprints from the Maker." What does all this have to do with the Bible? Among all the ancient peoples, only the Hebrews got their cosmology right. While the rest of the world believed in a magical, eternal universe that gave birth to the gods, only they believe in an eternal, transcendent God who gave the universe its beginning. Like every cause, the Cause of the universe must be independent of its effect. Thus, the First Cause must be separate from the universe, not a part of it. From ancient times, the Bible has clearly presented God as non-physical, a Spirit who cannot be contained, even by the heavens. Unlike other ancient religious writings, the Bible prohibited the making of images of God, making it a point to teach that He is not a physical being. The consensus of modern science is that the universe – and time itself – had a beginning. Nothing that is confined to time could have created the cosmos. God must not only be separate from His creation, but He must exist outside of time. Again, from ancient days, the Bible specifically defined God as the I AM, operating outside of time and existing before the universe He created. Perhaps the universe had a beginning, but how do we know that it didn’t begin by chance? Stephen Hawking wrote, "If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million, the universe would have re-collapsed before it ever reached it present state." Slightly faster than the critical rate and matter would have dispersed too rapidly to allow stars and galaxies to form. George Smoot describes the creation even as "finely orchestrated." Carl Sagan admitted: "It is easy to see that only a very restricted range of laws of nature are consistent with galaxies and stars, planets, life and intelligence. Hawking cities the critical ratio between the masses of the proton and the electron as one of many fundamental numbers in nature. He adds: "The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to nave been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life." The calculations of Hawking’s associate, Roger Penrose, show that the highly ordered (low entropy) initial state for the universe is not something that could have occurred by even the wildest chance. When Fred Hoyle calculated the likelihood that carbon would have precisely the required resonance by chance, he said that his atheism was greatly shaken, adding: "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics." Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson writes, "The more I examine the universe and the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense must have known we were coming." NASA astronomer John O’Keefe says, "It is my view that these circumstances indicate that the universe was created for man to live in." But isn’t religion just a cultural phenomenon, a form of superstition? For many it is. But perhaps the ultimate superstition is to believe that this physical universe is imbued with mystical powers that enable it to bring itself into existence and then to fine-tune itself. In the matter of deciding who’s running the universe, we all have just three choices: the universe itself, humankind, or God. Because a cause must precede its effect, the first two options violate logic, especially now that we know the universe did not exist in eternity past. Atheism and pantheism are difficult to reconcile with modern findings. But the Bible fits perfectly, telling us that God is not just a force that’s one with the universe, but who is separate from His creation. And like modern physics, the Bible points to a Creator who is super-intelligent, a perfectionist who cares about us a great deal. Then why would God let our world get into such a mess? Indeed, the most important implication of a perfectly designed universe is that a perfect Designer would do something about the problem of evil in our world. So what might a super-intelligent, caring Creator do? Make creatures who have no wills of their own, so that they cannot bring evil into His perfect universe? Not if God desired to have an eternal relationship with a people who would willingly return His love. The very idea of a real will to love requires the real possibility of a person’s will being used to reject. So what might be God’s options, after his race of free-willed creatures broke the harmony of His universe (as they have obviously done in our case)? He could exterminate them. He could simply overlook their injustices. He could leave them alone to let them try to straighten out their own mess. But none of these options show the forethought of a perfect, super-intelligent, caring Creator. The Bible, the one book that gave us a true picture of God since ancient times, gives us the one solution that shows great care and forethought, though we might never have thought of it ourselves. What did God do? He died for us. He showed both perfect justice and unbounded mercy. And by doing so, He gave those who wanted to be reconciled to Him the chance to be forever changed, to be eventually made into fit company for Him throughout eternity. This was His plan "before time began." (1 Corinthians 2:7). But what about this biblical idea of God becoming man? What about the concept of sacrifice? Aren’t these primitive concepts? If the Creator of the universe wanted to communicate to us (moderns and ancients both) what He is like, how could He show us more clearly than by becoming one of us? If He wanted to communicate to us the seriousness of breaking His moral law, how could He show us more forcefully than by demanding that the most valuable thing in the universe be forfeited as a penalty? And if He wanted to tell us how much He loves us, how could He do so more dramatically than by dying for us? But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him, and by His wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:5-6) But giving intellectual assent to the historical idea that Jesus died on a Roman cross won’t change anyone’s life. Biblical faith always implied personal trust, a personal relationship. This relationship gives us the ability to talk to Him, not just about Him. This relationship, after all, is the reason He created us. It means our lives aren’t pointless; we don’t live only to have all memory of us snuffed out in a few generations and throughout eternity. Rather, we find access to eternity through the One who exists outside of time. This is the one relationship that can give our lives lasting value.
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word.
Well, let’s talk about this. You have a pretty poor understanding of what a miracle actually is, for one thing. And you have a nonexistent understanding of what progressive creationists and theistic evolutionists say for another. Progressive creationists do not believe in evolution, per se, though they do agree with the evidence of creation that the world, indeed the universe, is a very old place. But they see God continually creating through that time. A better explanation of Hugh Ross’ position may be found at: http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/progressive.html The fact is that neither progressive creationists nor theistic evolutionists exclude God from the process. But your statement about the "miracle of His spoken Word" demonstrates an appalling misunderstanding of miracles and their place in the natural world. First of all, in Genesis 1 we see such interesting little statements as "Let the earth bring forth" and "Let the waters bring forth". God did not command simply a result. These statements demonstrate that He commanded a process. Furthermore these statements indicate that life was not created ex-nihilo, but out of the substances which brought them forth. Even man was not created ex-nihilo, but Genesis 2 says that as a potter God formed man out of the dust of the ground. If God is going to interact with the physical world, His Miraculous Works must of necessity be able to exist within the physical world as a part of it, obeying the Laws the Creator instilled into His Universe. Their substance would have to be of the substance of creation, and their final state compatible with it. The Genesis account is of necessity simplistic, for the people to whom it was told could not have understood the idea of time and natural forces. They did not know about bacteria and viruses. To them, sickness was a judgment of God instead of a natural event in the world. Yet the same God who made them made the viruses and the bacteria. The same God who created life also created the reality of death. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false.
You know, life is a lot simpler with your mentality. Either at absolute zero or fusion temperature and no in-betweens. Why cannot God’s Word work *through* the nature He creates, and over long periods of time? After all, He took an infinite amount of time before creating the universe anyway, right? Infinity so great you cannot measure time is common to the Christian concept of God. We talk about "no beginning" and "no ending", and that God had no beginning but always existed. So what’s a few billion years, or trillion years, for that matter? Or what do you think He was doing until He made the universe? Nothing? The fact is that God said for it to be done. But that does not tell us *how* it was done. Nor would it be reasonable for the Scriptures to have told about it. The people could not have understood it. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.).
Boy are you ever out of date! You can only use those ancient 1920’s arguments? Have to ignore the last 70-80 years of scientific advances? The only ones who harp on Piltdown or "embryonic recapitulation" are creationists. No one who uses evolution tries to prove it using either of these. But then, you *know* this, and you know you are lying by saying it. Remember YM1, IKHDY, or whatever you call yourself — God says that all liars will be denied entrance to heaven. The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us.
Nope. The Scripture does not tell us what God did to create it. Not one niggling little bit. It is sort of like looking at plans for a skyscraper. The financier says, "Let it be built!", and it was built. But the command to build does not tell how. To say that it was "the word of His power" says nothing about the method of creation. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man. The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability. The thrust of the sencond and third parties is confusion-they are neither evolutionists nor Christians. The thrust of the fourth party is to trust God and take Him at His Word knowing that He is intelligent enough to know what He is writing to us.
Well, I wouldn’t actually say that you are trusting God. I would say that you trust your own understanding, thinking that to be the same thing as trusting God. Should God Himself speak to you out of the heavens and tell you that you were wrong, you would bury yourself in your interpretation of the Scriptures and deny that He had spoken at all. Raymond E. Griffith
Response:
I refuse to respond to threads from this asshole since he never has the guts or the decency to respond, so why bother? Must be his Christian Brotherhood showing through!
He can’t be an actual Christian, since he resolutely disobeys the teachings of Jesus Christ by lying about people he doesn’t even know. And yes, he is enough of a hypocrite to killfile anyone who is actually on to his game and lets him know it. — Dave Oldridge+ ICQ 1800667 A false witness is worse than no witness at all.
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions.
Liar. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.).
More lies. The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man.
But God did not write the Bible and He did not inspire your interpretation of it. Who is inspiring your lies? Not God! The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability. The thrust of the sencond and third parties is confusion-they are neither evolutionists nor Christians.
Lies. The thrust of the fourth party is to trust God and take Him at His Word knowing that He is intelligent enough to know what He is writing to us.
And now you are lying to us about yourself, because you do not trust God at all. Instead you trust in your lies. God said "Thou shalt not bear false witness." YOU say "Thou shalt bear false witness against scientists if they disagree with the Holy Interpretation." God says that by sticking to this doctrine after being warned by His messengers, you are living in a state of mortal sin. You can only exit that state by repenting the sins and seeking God’s absolution. I would suggest that penance might start with recanting the lies in the places where you told them. There is no miracle in your lies, only false witness. Much of it about people you don’t even know. You SHOULD be ashamed of yourself, but instead your possessing demon makes you PROUD of your sins. — Dave Oldridge+ ICQ 1800667 A false witness is worse than no witness at all.
Response:
The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false.
Maybe one is true for some things and the other true for others. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.). The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man. The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability. The thrust of the sencond and third parties is confusion-they are neither evolutionists nor Christians. The thrust of the fourth party is to trust God and take Him at His Word knowing that He is intelligent enough to know what He is writing to us.
Response:
He made some other progress too. Once it was pointed out to him precisely WHERE his addresses were screwed up, he fixed them so I don’t have to when I reply to each one of his posts anymore. Of course, it had to be pointed out to him numerous times
Response:
I refuse to respond to threads from this asshole since he never has the guts or the decency to respond, so why bother? Must be his Christian Brotherhood showing through! Bob Humanist Brit Hong Kong – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The Miracles of God The atheistic evolutionist, theistic evolutionist and the progressive creationist all claim that the universe, solar systems, planets, and life came about by natural processes occuring over long periods of time. God says these same things came about by the miracle of His spoken Word. These two statements cannot both be true for if one is true the other must be false. So how can we tell which is which? Both are a matter of belief or faith for neither meets the criteria of science in that they were not observed, measured nor are reproducible under controlled conditions. The first party above uses smoke and mirrors to claim their opinions are really "facts" and their non-thinking followers harp away at what they are told even if it has already been proven to be false(life coming from non-life, spotted moths, embryonic recapitulation, Piltdown, Java, Piking, Neanderthal man, etc.). The second party uses the Bible, God’s Word with it’s simple, straight forward description of what God did to create all that we observe around us. Never has anything God said been disproven over the many centuries since it was given to man. The thrust of the first party is to deny God and do what they choose without accountability. The thrust of the sencond and third parties is confusion-they are neither evolutionists nor Christians. The thrust of the fourth party is to trust God and take Him at His Word knowing that He is intelligent enough to know what He is writing to us.
Response:
"Chuckles" wrote … [...] I’ll become a believer the first time I receive a message actually written by God. Somehow, I don’t expect that to happen very soon…
A few perspectives on the concepts of belief, doubt, and disbelief … Of course, with events, no matter what the claims, and no matter who is claiming to either be God, be speaking for God, be inspired by God, basing their God expositions on ancient texts, basing their God expositions on ancient prophets, based their God expositions on an intellectual investigation of all matters present in the natural world … The only way to believe rather than be forced is to possess the most precious of human rights, that being the freedom to make a choice. In order to have that freedom, one must possess the lowly regarded (by many believers) ability to doubt and disbelieve. Believers rejoice, often, in the freedom they have to doubt and disbelieve in Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and all other religions not one with their own. However, what many of them oft-times forget is that without the freedom to doubt and disbelieve in their own religion, they would be naught but slaves to their own religion. Hopefully, religious followers won’t forget how hor- rific this earth was in times past when a particular religion asserted people *had* to believe, or else suffer imprisonment, torture, or death. In the modern day, freedom is all that stands be- tween humans and religious tyranny. Cherishing freedom of religion demands that freedom of doubt and disbelief also be cherished. – - –
] Reality’s a bitch, ain’t it, ladies? 
SYD 
