Are you a Christian?

[MASSEY]

Who are "they".........ah it's the strawmen again.......them nasty people who "know" and have "complete knowledge". Let's burn them.

Do you not agree you have made a leap of faith?

 

[jonmcculloch]

Ok so you agree it's a theory and as such is unprovable. We cannot recreate creation and so it cannot be observed, measured or proven. I think that was you original question........prove creation or am I misquoting?

Nothing in science is provable, not in the mathematical sense.

All science can do is come to tentative conclusions.

But the word "theory" has a very different meaning in science from the layman's meaning. And evolution IS a theory -- and it's been elevated in status from "hypothesis" to "theory" because of the MASS of evidence supporting it. It's still falsifiable, of course. And if it's falsified, then I'll be the first to embrace an alternative hypothesis.

Creation isn't a theory at all -- creation is an unfalsifiable hypothesis not backed up with any evidence.

So why would anyone believe it?

Warmly,

Jon

 

[jonmcculloch]

Let's burn them.

Show me where I said or implied this, and I'll write a cheque for £1,000 to a charity of your choice. And if you can't show it, then at least admit you're making things up.

Warmly,

Jon

 

[bdw]

If you want to debate evidence then read the Case for Christ and then we'll debate it; making emotive statements about childish belief is silly.

Evidence that someone called Christ existed proves nothing about religion.

.

 

[jonmcculloch]

I didn't make up the stories. If you want to debate evidence then read the Case for Christ and then we'll debate it; making emotive statements about childish belief is silly. But then you feel that it's a mental disease and there is not much point proceeding. It takes far too much time to look at the evidence; to wrap it all up in one statement like "childish stories" is a bit pompous.

Even if Jesus existed, this does not a. say anything about the veracity of his claims to be the son of god; b. falsify evolution.

And so your point is...?

Warmly,

Jon

 

[stockdam]

Show me where I said or implied this, and I'll write a cheque for £1,000 to a charity of your choice. And if you can't show it, then at least admit you're making things up.

Warmly,

Jon

What??? Where did I say that you said this? I said it not you. I implied that you were making up a story about "they".

And if you can show me where ............. or at least admit you're making things up.

 

[stockdam]

Even if Jesus existed, this does not a. say anything about the veracity of his claims to be the son of god; b. falsify evolution.

And so your point is...?

Warmly,

Jon

Where did I say anything about Christ falsifying evolution........you are beating that drum and nobody is listening.

Ok your point is that Young Earth Creationists don't believe in evolution but I am at a loss to understand why it pops up when you reply to me.

 

[jonmcculloch]

What??? Where did I say that you said this? I said it not you. I implied that you were making up a story about "they".

And if you can show me where ............. or at least admit you're making things up.

Your using the same pronoun in the sentence following clearly indicates "they" are the same people -- and since you were talking about me in that context, it's reasonable to assume you were implying I would want to burn people for having irrational beliefs.

If I'm wrong, I apologise.

So whom were you implying would want to do the burning? It seems to me burning people is a quintessentially Christian thing that's been done many times in the name of the Lord.

But let's not get distracted.

What evidence do you have for creation? And what evidence do you have to falsify the theory of evolution?

Warmly,

Jon

 

[bdw]

I think you two should do your tit for tatting by PM. No?

.

 

[stockdam]

Evidence that someone called Christ existed proves nothing about religion.

.

It's the proof game again. Ok so we discuss that creation and existence of God cannot be proven or falsified so you then want proof. It's like CJDs Proof of Evolution (the 29 proofs) that turned out to be evidences.

 

[bdw]

Ok so we discuss that creation and existence of God cannot be proven or falsified so you then want proof.

No, I didn't say that I wanted proof. I already know that there is no proof of the existence of any god and that there can never be any.

.

 

[stockdam]

Your using the same pronoun in the sentence following clearly indicates "they" are the same people -- and since you were talking about me in that context, it's reasonable to assume you were implying I would want to burn people for having irrational beliefs.

If I'm wrong, I apologise.

So whom were you implying would want to do the burning? It seems to me burning people is a quintessentially Christian thing that's been done many times in the name of the Lord.

No I wasn't implying that you would burn anyone.

You said.....

They make the leap of faith from ignorance of what we cannot know to complete knowledge of a being that cares what we do with our bottoms.

Warmly,

Jon

Then I said.....

Who are "they".........ah it's the strawmen again.......them nasty people who "know" and have "complete knowledge". Let's burn them.

The "they" refers to the same "they" in your post; the people who make the leap of faith and then have complete knowledge. But since nobody here was claiming that they are the "they" then it's a strawman argument.

The burning........I was "burning" the strawmen......not real people but "images" made out of straw.

I apologise if you think I implied that you (or anyone else here) would advocate burning anyone. Oh then I noticed that you want to tar me with that in your post above.........ok whatever.

 

[stockdam]

What evidence do you have for creation? And what evidence do you have to falsify the theory of evolution?

Ok the broken record trick. I clearly said above that creation is a one-off and is therefore outside of anyone's ability to prove or to provide evidence that is credible for any theory of creation of the universe.

Post after post I said that I had no issue about evolution so why do I have to provide any evidence to falsify it.

This is fast becoming a waste of time going round in circles.

 

[MASSEY]

Just found some jehovah propaganda in the porch, inviting me examine the significance of jesus' death.

 

[MASSEY]

I think you two should do your tit for tatting by PM. No?

.

It's always nice to see stockdom wriggle

 

[jonmcculloch]

Post after post I said that I had no issue about evolution so why do I have to provide any evidence to falsify it.

This is fast becoming a waste of time going round in circles.

I didn't see those until after I'd posted.

So am I correct in thinking you're a creationist, but you think (some) god kicked it all off at the beginning and left it to it?

Warmly,

Jon

 

[cjd]

It takes far too much time to look at the evidence; to wrap it all up in one statement like "childish stories" is a bit pompous.

There is NO evidence for a supernatural deity that takes an interest in our wellbeing and intercedes in our lives. None at all.

If you have just the faintest piece of verifiable evidence please show us all.

 

[hmmm]

nope........

 

[jonmcculloch]

If you have just the faintest piece of verifiable evidence please show us all.

There's the bible. It's the word of God. It says so in it, so it must be true.

Warmly,

Jon

 

[hmmm]

possibly ............#

you cant beat a bit of mythology ,evolution , creation,,,,there all true

 

[jonmcculloch]

possibly ............#
you cant beat a bit of mythology ,evolution , creation,,,,there all true

How do you know they are all true?

Warmly,

Jon

 

[stockdam]

It's always nice to see stockdom wriggle

If you say so Mossey.

 

[hmmm]

sorry john i missed out the imo off the end

all 3 are true imo as they are all from the same source (maybe)

 

[DCE]

There's no reason why we (science) should be able to understand everything that I can think of - but that doesn't mean that it's right to make up stories about things that we have no knowledge or evidence for.

The most likely reason that things can't be detected or measured - by which I assume you mean God - is that they don't exist. Or if they do exist they can't affect us. Either way God's out of our equation.

(btw, there's no logical reason to assume that what we call creation was a one off - one possible scenario is that the last big bang was just the latest of a series of contractions and expansions of the universe.)

Either way God's out of our equation you boldly say Colin

Are you absolutely sure your out of God's equation.

You need to get to know who God really is, and all his wonderful qualities, and understand what the Gift of Life really means, through the Ransom Sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which God lovingly provided, so we could have everlasting life on earth.

(John 3:16-18) 16*“For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life. 17*For God sent forth his Son into the world, not for him to judge the world, but for the world to be saved through him. 18*He that exercises faith in him is not to be judged. He that does not exercise faith has been judged already, because he has not exercised faith in the name of the only-begotten Son of God.

 

[jonmcculloch]

You need to get to know who God really is, and all his wonderful qualities,

Would this be the same childish, spiteful insecure god who insists on constant worship, claims to be loving and merciful yet causes untold suffering on the earth?

Would this be the same "all powerful" god who is this very minute allowing thousands of children to die of hunger, mistreatment and easily preventable disease?

In my opinion, your god isn't fit to kiss my you-know-what.

And why don't you ever answer my questions DCE?

Your lot love to knock on doors and ask us "have you thought about God?" but you don't seem willing to return the favour and answer questions we have for you.

Warmly,

Jon

 

[stugster]

Jon,

DCE wont answer your questions. He's far too engrossed in the dogma and, in my opinion, he's gone so far as he's now completely deluded. He wont read anything that could question God or his religion because he's not allowed. If he did that, he'd see how stupid it all is. So they don't let him.

People like DCE stand to lose so much if they started to think properly. All those years lost.

 

[jonmcculloch]

sorry john i missed out the imo off the end

all 3 are true imo as they are all from the same source (maybe)

But it's logically impossible for them all to be true because they are contradictory in many places.

How do you manage to reconcile contradictions in your mind and have the opinion they can both be true at once?

I'm genuinely curious.

Warmly,

Jon

 

[hmmm]

biology ...........................
things being tinkered with ...
the history of earth itself .....
the higher being.....

i just read that you said god has a need to be worshiped constantly..i dont believe that is the case..i think man has deemed it to be that way and took it upon him/herself to do so out of a feeling of being less . i was under the impression that god said not to make idols of anything in heaven above which to me possibly also means god

 

[jonmcculloch]

biology ...........................
things being tinkered with ...
the history of earth itself .....
the higher being.....

That doesn't explain how you can reconcile a logical impossibility, like, say, a light being on and off at the same time. It is either one or the other.

There are contradictions in all the scriptures of this nature.

In other words you are claiming to believe several things some of which are mutually exclusive.

i just read that you said god has a need to be worshiped constantly..i dont believe that is the case..i think man has deemed it to be that way and took it upon him/herself to do so out of a feeling of being less . i was under the impression that god said not to make idols of anything in heaven above which to me possibly also means god

I am just going by what their book of fairy tales says.

I think by expressing faith in believing in something you cannot measure in any way, people are showing themselves to be mentally ill.

Warmly,

Jon

 

[hmmm]

That doesn't explain how you can reconcile a logical impossibility, like, say, a light being on and off at the same time. It is either one or the other.



There are contradictions in all the scriptures of this nature.

In other words you are claiming to believe several things some of which are mutually exclusive.

light from stars may seem on when there not .what is seen is not always what is



I am just going by what their book of fairy tales says.

the book of "fairy tales says not to make idols of anything in heaven above,so to me your not going by it at all

I think by expressing faith in believing in something you cannot measure in any way, people are showing themselves to be mentally ill.

but unfortunately commandments make sense and are a good measure of what way to live life. to not live by them i would argue makes one mentally ill..although i wouldnt use those words.i would say misguided in some way

Warmly,

Jon

whilst i see how the book could be seen as fairy tales because of things that maybe added here and there ,one cannot dismiss certain things init that cannot be dismissed and switch the light on of question..

 

[stugster]

one cannot dismiss certain things init that cannot be dismissed and switch the light on of question..

I'd be really interested to hear what things cannot be dismissed.

 

[jonmcculloch]

one cannot dismiss certain things init that cannot be dismissed and switch the light on of question..

Anything claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

light from stars may seem on when there not

Yes, SEEM. The star is either emitting light or it isn't. It cannot be in both states at the same time. Your analogy is flawed.

Warmly,

Jon

 

[hmmm]

Anything claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.



Yes, SEEM. The star is either emitting light or it isn't. It cannot be in both states at the same time. Your analogy is flawed.

but surely that depends on from where your looking.if your close to it then its not on,if your light years away then its on..this can apply to almost anything ..ANYTHING....if your close to "god" then its there if not then it isnt .(maybe)
if the person close to the light that isnt on had for arguments sake a radio to communicate to the person far away.he says the lights off the other guy says no its not .but how can this be

Warmly,

Jon

there is never one way or the other .as ive said before using number/math, there is always 3

 

[garytulley]

Anything claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.



Yes, SEEM. The star is either emitting light or it isn't. It cannot be in both states at the same time. Your analogy is flawed.

Warmly,

Jon

Actually Jon there is a way, a light from a star can be reaching us even though the star itself has burnt out long ago.

Not a fan of the bible myself though, I got bought one as a kid, my mother tried telling me all other religions were evil. What a plank she is. I remember reading the first 10 lines of the bible before it went into my wardrobe for 5 years then made it's way into my loft.

 

[jonmcculloch]

but surely that depends on from where your looking.if your close to it then its not on,if your light years away then its on

No, the star itself is either emitting light or it isn't. Your seeing the light that's still in transit from the star to the rest of the universe is independent of this.

Your analogy is flawed.

Let me give you an example even you won't be able to get wrong.

A number cannot be odd and even at the same time. A number cannot be a prime number or a composite number at the same time.

These states are mutually exclusive. By saying, in effect, "all things are true" you are saying, implicitly, that a number can be odd and even at the same time.

there is never one way or the other .as ive said before using number/math, there is always 3

What does this mean, exactly?

Warmly,

Jon

 

[jonmcculloch]

Actually Jon there is a way, a light from a star can be reaching us even though the star itself has burnt out long ago.

Yes, I am perfectly aware of this. But we are talking about the star, not the light already emitted by it.

Warmly,

Jon

 

[hmmm]

I'd be really interested to hear what things cannot be dismissed.

ive already given you something.the commandments........they are undeniable

 

[hmmm]

Yes, I am perfectly aware of this. But we are talking about the star, not the light already emitted by it.

Warmly,

Jon

yes,so what we are talking about is the same thing

 

[stockdam]

I think by expressing faith in believing in something you cannot measure in any way, people are showing themselves to be mentally ill.

I think you need to reel in your crass comments. You are the person with the mental problem when you make childish comments like that.

It's your way or no way and anyone who doesn't believe in what you believe in is mentally ill. Wow that's a great attitude to have.

So do you believe that people should only believe in things they can measure? Do you believe that humans can see colour? How would you measure colour?

What about love? Do you believe it exists? Can you measure it?

Science has limitations and is based on human limitations. It cannot describe everything and everything cannot be measured. But then you get into a world you are uncomfortable with because it cannot be measured.

 

[jonmcculloch]

ive already given you something.the commandments........they are undeniable

What do you mean they are undeniable?

Warmly,

Jon