Letters from Visitors to ExChristian.Net and Replies.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

A letter from Charles M

Hello, I was impressed by the webmasters testimonial and all the work he did over the years for the Bible. I understand that there is a lot wrong with the churches in America and elsewhere. There are to many stumbling blocks put there by people in churches. Also lots of churches dont accept what the Bible says and dont understand it. I dont see the point of investigating the Bible if you dont check out the basics of what it says. For instance if evolution is true then the Bible is not. Simple. If this question is not satisfactorily settled it does not matter how well you know the Bible or how much someone wants to be a christian the whole thing is just going to self destruct at some point in the future. So check out the claims of evolution - do they really stand up ? are they really 'scientific' ? or is the seemingly implausible idea of creation more logical ? These are the issues that individuals must work out to their satisfaction.

Also, what about Noahs flood ? Is there any evidence ? Why dont you Google it and see ? If its true and if there is lots of evidence for relatively recent catastrophe - and there should be if it is true then what issued does this raise ? Could all this God loves everyone stuff be wrong after all if he really did kill all those millions of people in a flood he didnt love them very much did He? Not much of a 'wonderful plan for their lives eh ?' maybe most of the preachers are lieing and maybe their congregations like it that way.

Maybe the real God of the Bible isnt to be messed with maybe the problem today is there is no fear of God and that swhy so many on this site have given up because of the appaling example set by many christians and their ignorance concerning what should be the foundational truths of what they claim to believe in. Welll friends I do hope you will take my advice and see if there are any hard facts in the areas of Geology, archaeology, biochemistry etc to back up what the Bible says. I found that there is an abundance and as one would expect from a reasonable God He has not left Himself without testimony, far from it. We dont need blind faith to accept the creator, He says use reason not your heart. If you dont at least have a look to see then you will not after all be sincere will you ?
 
Comments:
Blogger Trans-man said...
That's how I dismissed religion from my life: I did my research and came up with the result that there is no proof of god, no proof of Jesus, no proof of the flood, no proof of a lot of other things that the Bible declares as truth.


'Well friends I do hope you will take my advice and see if there are any hard facts in the areas of Geology, archaeology, biochemistry etc to back up what the Bible says. I found that there is an abundance and....'

Here we go gathering nuts in May,
Nuts in May, nuts in May.
Here we go gathering nuts in May,
On a cold and frosty morning.


Blogger PerryStL said...
Hello, I'm impressed at your attempt to come across as friendly and cordial while looking down your nose at us.

I also realize there's a lot wrong with churches in America and elsewhere. These things include lying and killing to increase market share, bigotry toward women, blacks and non-Christians, and blatant hypocrisy in every realm of their existence.

If you check out the "facts" of the your holy magic book, and you really want to believe what it says, and you ignore the parts you can't explain away, and you squint your eyes just right, the Bible, Koran and even Dianetics all make perfect sense.

It's obvious that you know very little about science and you're just regurgitating the words that have been shoved down your throat.

Maybe YOU should check-out the facts from a reputable source "Friend" instead of harassing people.


Blogger Ricky said...
I also dismissed religion from my life through reason. I'm not really sure where you did your research, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't on Wikipedia (or its sources at the bottom of the page that are listed so that you can verify them yourself), or any scientific journals, textbooks, etc etc.

By the way, why don't you enlighten us with the reasons to believe? I'd really like to know what you'll come up with. Will you pull out the "Josephus" card? Even Christian experts agree that it his writings might have been "altered" (i.e. forged).

If his work wasn't forged, then which is more possible? (You said, use reason, not faith, so I expect you to do so now.) Is it more possible that God needed to sacrifice himself to make himself forgive humanity that he always knew would sin?...He would send his son down to perform miracles (to a few dozen people, when there are millions right now that are desperate for help) and then die, and then rise up again into heaven?

OR...Is it possible that some people just paid a jewish historian (i.e. Josephus) to make crap up?

Is it more possible that the red-footed booby and the blue-footed booby are more closely related to each other, than each of them are to an elephant? In God's law, they're all created separately, so in fact a red-footed booby is just as closely related to an elephant. Of course, you would have to disregard all of the fossil and DNA evidence that shows otherwise.

I could go on, but instead, I'll let you have a chance to make me into a laughing stock by showing me how I'm so completely wrong. Remember, use reason, not faith.


Blogger Ricky said...
By the way, I hope you don't use the old "Science shows that around 5,000 years B.C., there was a major flood around the Persian Gulf / Black Sea... THEREFORE God exists" argument...


Blogger Jim Arvo said...
Charles said "Welll friends I do hope you will take my advice and see if there are any hard facts in the areas of Geology, archaeology, biochemistry etc to back up what the Bible says."

That is excellent advice, Charles. I hope everyone here will heed it. I'd just like to add that it's important not to settle for the first bit of evidence that is to your liking, but to always seek out differing opinions--see what the very best arguments on the other side are, and try to thoroughly understand them. Would you agree?

Charles continued "I found that there is an abundance [of evidence for God] and as one would expect from a reasonable God He has not left Himself without testimony, far from it."

Hmmmm.... How very odd. That's exactly the opposite of what I've found. Shall we compare notes? Are you open to ideas and opinions that may draw different conclusions from the same observations, or to observations that may suggest conclusions different from your own? If so, let's discuss...


Blogger Brother Jeff said...
So check out the claims of evolution - do they really stand up ? are they really 'scientific' ?

Yes they do, and yes they are. The fact of evolution is the backbone of modern Biology. Science puts the silly creation myths in the bible to shame.

Also, what about Noahs flood ? Is there any evidence ?

None whatsoever. And there are many problems with this ridiculous myth, not the least of which is that it was borrowed from earlier mythology.

Maybe the real God of the Bible isnt to be messed with

The god of the bible isn't real, but if he was, he would be the greatest mass murderer in history! Read your bible!

You act as if you think we haven't done our research, which would be far from the truth. I personally left the faith after I saw how easy it was to debunk everything foundational to the Christian religion. The bible is nothing but a collection of ancient religious myths and lies. Do yourself a favor and actually do some research and WAKE THE FUCK UP and stop letting other people do your thinking for you and learn to THINK FOR YOURSELF. Glory!


Blogger schala25 said...
Charles,

How wonderfully ironic that you should come here cajoling us to do research, no doubt expecting that if we do we'll see "the light" that is God and Christianity, when that very research is what led many of us to realize how very full of crap it all is.

You say that we don't need blind faith, that we should use reason. I agree. In fact, I think simple reason and logic shows, just as one example, how impossible a story such as Noah's Ark is. In fact, there is a wonderful article that goes into great detail about all the impossibilities involved in such an endeavor.

Since you are sincere in your search, I am sure you would be happy to check it out for yourself:
The Impossible Voyage of Noah's Ark by Robert Moore. Enjoy!


Blogger boomSLANG said...
Charles...Also lots of churches dont accept what the Bible says...

Dear Charles,

First and foremost, churches don't agree on what the "bible says". If we first consider that fact - and yes, it needs to be considered - then yes, "lots of churches" may not accept what Charles and his church believe "the bible says". After all, you'd be hard-pressed to find me any church that readily admits to interpreting scripture incorrectly. Such an admission would be quite ridiculous, wouldn't you agree? Do you see the subjectiveness of it, now? Let me know.

Charles....For instance if evolution is true then the Bible is not[true].

Yes, precisely!....and similarly, if it is true that the earth is spherical in shape, then the bible is not true. AND, if it is true that the sun is heliocentric, then the bible is not true. 'Get the picture?

Charles...So check out the claims of evolution - do they really stand up ?

Yes, they do, hence, why Evolution is both theory, and fact. But let's suppose evolution is neither, okay? Okay, here we go.....

Charles, where is your testible/falsifiable evidence for "Creation"...i.e.."magic"????? 'Listening.

Chalres...Maybe the real God of the Bible isnt to be messed with...

Maybe there isn't a "real" biblegod to "mess with". 'Ever think of it from that perspective? I say it is the simplist explanation, makes the most sense, and is the most consistant with reality.

Charles....I found that there is an abundance[of "hard facts" that support the existence of the Christian biblegod, specifically] and as one would expect from a reasonable God He has not left Himself without testimony, far from it.

Testimony, eh? I must be frank, I'll wager that what you "see" as a "testimony", is merely Nature, and from there, your intuition(gut instinct), in conjunction with wishful thinking; in conjuction with your book of revealed knowledge, tells you that it's a "testimony" to a deity.


Blogger Astreja said...
Charles M, there are so many things wrong with your little essay that it's hard to know where to start.

"Also lots of churches dont accept what the Bible says and dont understand it."

Personally, I do not care which churches, in your opinion, "accept" or "understand" the Bible. I think the Bible itself is a very poor example of ancient historical fiction muddled up with some rather ghastly mythology.

"For instance if evolution is true then the Bible is not. Simple."

The evidence for evolution is overwhelmingly positive. Therefore, the likelihood of the Bible being true is rather small indeed.

"Also, what about Noahs flood ? Is there any evidence ?"

For a worldwide flood, with water to the top of the highest mountain on the planet? No. Categorically no. The story is almost certainly false.

And this is why:

To cover the entire planet to the summit of Chomolungma (a.k.a. Mount Everest, 29028 feet above sea level), in the alleged forty days, it would have to rain at a rate of 30.2375 feet of rain per hour.

Assuming for one wild-ass moment that a man previously unskilled in boat-building managed to round up enough gopher wood to build the Ark...

And assuming that he was actually able to round up two of everything and stuff it into said Ark...

And then assuming that, after adding all the necessary foodstuffs to keep all those animals alive for the trip...

...The force of the rain alone would swamp the decks, capsize the boat and send it to the bottom long before the end of the first day.

The Flood story is crap. Pure mythology, stolen from the Mesopotamian Epic of Creation which was, in turn, a fictionalized account of a bad flood in the Euphrates/Tigris area some millenia ago.

"Maybe the real God of the Bible isnt to be messed with..."

Maybe, just maybe, "the real God of the Bible" simply doesn't exist.

"Welll friends I do hope you will take my advice and see if there are any hard facts in the areas of Geology, archaeology, biochemistry etc to back up what the Bible says."

Not from what I've seen, Charles. I've been fascinated by science since I was a little girl, and just turned fifty this past year... And, the more I learn about science, the more preposterous the Bible becomes in My eyes. (I can always double-check with My brother, who happens to be a biochemist and a geneticist, but don't hold your breath.)

"...at least have a look to see then you will not after all be sincere will you?"

You know, that's one of the egregiously arrogant things I've heard in quite a while. How fucking dare you assume that we are not sincere, just because our conclusions differ radically from yours.

Get lost.


Blogger WhateverLolaWants said...
So, are you saying you do believe in the god of the Bible? Then how DO you answer those questions you posed about God supposedly killing everyone on Earth (except Noah and his clan)- does God love everyone? Is that just a lie that pastors tell, but the Bible doesn't support?


Blogger billybee said...
Take my advise; half your medication.


Blogger I Broke Free said...
Charles I have spent the last forty years reading about geology, archaeology, and other sciences. It has always been a passion of mine. And yet I have come to the exact opposite conclusion that you have. I do not see the handy work of a creator at all; in fact I see an Earth and a universe that is completely natural in origin and oblivious to human needs and desires. I do not search for god because I have yet to see a reason to do so. No god has ever made it clear to me that it is an important endeavor, only people like you have done so. And then none of you agree, so what is the point of listening to you Charles? You have provided us with nothing at all that differs from countless other claims.

Like I said I do not seek out god, but I do believe the Christian god can be discounted. Think about your beliefs Charles, what is the real basis for Christianity? The way I see it you have adopted the belief that you were created flawed and that your god finds you unworthy of his presence. Yes there is your belief in ‘salvation’ but that is not the basis of your faith. Without being worthy of eternal damnation, salvation is meaningless. Charles, you have adopted a belief system that is sick and twisted to its very core. It is a belief that focuses on personal salvation rather humanity, a belief that leads to always second guessing what god wants, rather than using your inborn compassion to guide you. I see your faith as evil and a detriment to human growth. No thank you.

I Broke Free


Blogger Trancelation said...
In other words, unless we reach the same conclusion as Charles, we're not being "sincere."

Yeah, sounds like Charles is being REAL "sincere" himself.

*snorts*


Blogger Rastilin said...
I am completely certain that evolution is objectively true and the story of the flood is objectively false.

I agree completely with you, if you don't take care of these things first, it'll all fall apart later. However it's important to consider that if you're getting your anti-evolution info from the pastor; he has all the reasons in the world to be less than truthful. Especially considering the aforementioned hyporcrisy that people are accusing the churches of.


Blogger Aspentroll said...
Well, Charles, I guess you got shit and shoved in it. Your ass must be bloody and bruised
from the thorough kicking it got here today. There is a way out though, You can say, "Jeez, guys, I was just kidding and didn't really mean what I said". Then we will have a big group hug and allow your sorry bruised ass into the fold. Then again, most likely not.


Blogger AtheistToothFairy said...
Charles M wrote:
Maybe the real God of the Bible isnt to be messed with maybe the problem today is there is no fear of God and that swhy so many on this site have given up because of the appaling example set by many christians and their ignorance concerning what should be the foundational truths of what they claim to believe in.
----
Charles,

I very much doubt you'll come back to defend your essay, but I would think you are at least reading the comments to it.

Why would you say the "real God of the Bible isnt to be messed with"?
He hasn't taken a single action in regards to this earth or it's humanity, in 2000 years, and then, only if one actually has faith that this god's son ever walked our earth.
Would you happen to have any evidence that jesus was real and did all those miracles your bible makes claim to?

So if your god has been silent and/or inept for all this time, then why should we fear this god of yours?
Your god sure doesn't bite and from what we've seen, doesn't even have a bark to scare us with.

Like almost every 'true christian' who comes to visit us, you mirror what they all tell us about how "appalling" so many xtians and their churches are. You assume that you have had some special communication with this jesus character and he has provided YOU with some divine truths.
Oddly enough, you would most likely not agree with many of the true xtians who come here and yet, we are to assume that all of you have been set straight by some holy ghostie.

If your god buddy was so real and pro-active with his own cherished flock, then why does this god send out so many mixed messages to his followers?
I know, you alone Charles hold the key to god's truth and I bet you just can't wait to share that knowledge with whomever you come in contact with, yes?

I'd say until you spend some time really learning science from sources other than your pastor and apologists, then you are just as brainwashed as the rest of your ilk.
To believe in a biblical global flood while at the same time, disbelieving in the evidence for evolution, surely say's plenty about why you think your god is talking to you.

Good luck in your own personal Matrix illusion.


ATF (Who knows that every xtian has nothing but "blind faith" to offer for 'proof')


Blogger Jackie said...
Doesn't the bible say the earth is flat? Doesn't it also say that the sun revolves around the earth? And why hasn't the troll come back to prove any of his claims? hmmm... we all know the answer to that.


Blogger PerryStL said...
Why wouldn't Charles M come back to defend his position? I can think of a few possibilities...

1) He's surprised? He's amazed that his words, which sounded so convincing when his preachers made the comments, isn't accepted at face value. Apparently we heathens aren't aware that we're not supposed to question preachers.

2) He's embarrassed? It's difficult to keep a straight face when one is proposing positions so full of holes that deep down even he doesn't believe them.

3) He's afraid? By talking to us, he's taking a chance of thinking for himself which in-turn may expose him to demonic possession.

4) He's sore? Spending so much time on his knees worshipping a nonexistent entity is tough on the ol' joints.

5) He's disappointed? If he doesn't have streets of gold or 72 virgins waiting for him when he dies, death sounds rather uninteresting.

Seriously Charles... Can't you find anything better to do with your life than harassing people on the Internet?


Blogger dunany77 said...
"Well friends I do hope you will take my advice and see if there are any hard facts in the areas of Geology, archaeology, biochemistry etc to back up what the Bible says."

Sure Chuck. Let me go check that out right now.......Hmmmm.......Let's see, the flood story is an ancient Mesopotamian myth that predates the bible.....there are lots of big ass dinosaur bones all over the place that are millions of years older than humans...........looks like human beings as we know them today have been around for 100 000 years at the very least......what's that? The bible says the earth is less than 10 000 years old? Oh, well how do you explain the light traveling to earth from stars that are a million light years away?.......what's that?.....Hello??...you still there Chuck???.......


Blogger Steven Bently said...
Well Charles I would have to agree with you, the sole reason I left the church it's is those damn Christians. I was running late to church one Sunday morning and there was only one parking space left and I'll have you know that one of those devoted xtains parked their Humvee crossways to where there was just not enough room to park my car...this of course, just furiated the crap hell out of me, I'm thinking what the living hell am I going to do?

I quickly began to panick, I knew that god would soon begin to judge me for being late and would send me to certain hell for not getting to church on time for to enter my overly generous tithe(20%)into the offering plate. I also knew that I would be called out and publicly embarrased by the pastor for being tardy.

So as an impulse solution I just drove my 1979 Subaru pickup right through the front church doors, ah the immediate aroma of musk and bootleg perfume and shoe polish was overwhelming.

I have never seen so many fear stricken Jesus loving xtians scattering and jumping out of windows crying screaming for their lives, begging for Jesus to save them from imminent doom, many of them making instant deals, pleading with Jesus just to let them live another day.

Yeah it was those damn xtains...lol


Blogger John of Indiana said...
Oh, how nice, ANOTHER one of those bible buy-bull burn-outs who think we rejected Xianity because one day we thought "Y'know, it's a real drag getting up early on Sunday morning. I think I'll reject the whole ball of wax and sleep in...".
You're an idiot, Charles. The ONLY "proof" you have of your gawd is that 6,000 year-old book of fables and myths.
To use your line of reasoning, Iluvatar and all the other beings and events related in Tolkein's "Sillmarillion" are also true. After all, it's in the book, right?


Blogger ryan said...
Charles, you wrote that "he says use reason, not your heart". Shit, that is where I fucked up ! All those churches told me to have faith ! And now I'm told to think? jesus, at the age of 60 I finally see the light !

All joking aside Charles--although you are just a barrel of monkeys--are you quoting the bible? Care to reveal chapter and verse? Since when does your jewgod give a rabbit's ass about reason?

Now about the flood: you flood people don't get it. I am frequently stunned by the hardness of the xristian heart. I do not care about your cute boatload of animals. What I care about is that god you worship. What sort of monster would kill all life on earth like that? I would sooner worship Satan than your god.

You of course have heard the expression about "giving your heart to jesus". When people are converted, they hand over not only their heart, but also their mind and conscience. That is why you can believe these horrors and not blink an eye.

One more little thing. I grew up on a farm, and farmers love animals. Any farmer who mistreats an animal is quickly ostracized by the others. I can assure you that the flood story is their least favorite story in the bible.


Blogger charles said...
Thanks for all the replys everyone, i only posted yesterday and i had a quick look today as an afterthought as i doubted if anyone would be interested in what i said and im not familiar with forums (honestly !) Anyway how wrong can you be ! Amazing 22 posts Excellent thankyou. Apparently my response is a little tardy by some peoples standards but there is no reticence on my part. BTW some people seem to think that I was being patronising by asking people to check the evidence and be sincere, well I can tell already you are sincere because this is an important matter to you all. In fact thats why i posted. What I was suggesting is testing all things we hear for instance is it intellectually honest and rigorous to take something the Bible does not say and use that as an argument ? For instance 'boomslang' seems to be saying that the Bible says the earth is flat i quote
''if it is true that the earth is spherical in shape, then the bible is not true ''

The Bible has this to say about the shape of the earth
'It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth' so not flat then and
'He spreads out the northern skies over empty space;
he suspends the earth over nothing' (in space )

I have noticed this technique a lot especially with reference to Noahs ark and the flood. For instance Noah did not have to take every living thing but only those that breathed through their nostrils and only the 'kind' not every variant and yet despite this scoffers produce huge lists of the millions of creatures ignoring what the Bible says on the matter.
Also it says they came to him meaning he didnt have to collect them and why suppose that there was different climatic areas in the Earth as there is today ? The Bible doesnt say that and if we are to fairly assess what the Bible says then we have to view it through the Bibles perspective.

Our friend Astreja says:

'To cover the entire planet to the summit of Chomolungma (a.k.a. Mount Everest, 29028 feet above sea level), in the alleged forty days, it would have to rain at a rate of 30.2375 feet of rain per hour.'
I m sure she is right if that were the case but the water from the flood did not come from the rain only some of it Genesis says ' the fountains of the deep were broken open ' this suggests some form of water storage underneath the upper crust of the earth and indeed Genesis says that prior to the flood it had never rained at all which is possibly why no one listened to Noah. Why suppose that Mt Everest was even there prior to the catastrophe ? After one year of Tsunamis, earthquake and volcanoes I think we can say that absolutely nothing remains of the old world.
Now we all have a presuppositional worldview but it does not have to get in the way if I am aware of it.
The Bible says the earth was raised up and the waters ran of the earth at the end of the flood.
If there really was a global flood like this what would we expect to find ? A world covered by rock laid down by water (sedimentary) full of billions of dead things ? Hey guess what ...... and the rest of it is volcanic. Ok so what about the millions of years and dating methods well check it out for yourself - They are based on circular reasoning and unproven assumptions - but decide for yourself anyone can google this stuff just type proof of noahs flood or problems with radio dating etc

Ok so the hot button topic is The flood (mentioned) BTW If the Bible says a flood covered the whole world then the whole world it must be and not some minor or local event (why build a boat in that case) and evolution.
Now as a layman the complexities of life and cell reproduction are startling to say the least. Not only that but the sheer volume of information which is transferred and duplicated successfully and reliably in the body every day is beyond comprehension. There is nor ever has been any such thing as a 'simple life form' This is a simple untruth. All life is and always has been complex. The fossil records show a sudden appearance of complex lifeforms with no preceeding type. Evolution as science and fact ? Lets consider what is being proposed, that by random chance processes (mutations)over aeons of time complex life came from simple life. Ok is this rational ? Firstly the origins of life - it is proposed that ultimately we are descended from a rock, from goo being hit by lightening etc . Now some things we do know and are fundemental laws of nature. We do not get order from chaos......ever.
All systems always degenerate or devolve they do not go to higher levels of complexity by themselves ......ever

The whole question of the Bible authority rests upon the creation, is it rational in the light of what we know about biochemistry for instance to suppose that life originated by accident ? of course not and i suggest that one reason why people are made unhappy by these questions is the failure to satisfactorily reconcile them but Google has been a great help to me anyway, no pastor told me this usually they are to scared to talk about the important stuff.
The Bible teaches we are playing for very high stakes lets not be hasty.
If youve got this far I thank you - gotta go


Blogger ryan said...
I do not attempt to respond to your whole post, charles. I leave that to the more scientifically able. Just a few observations.

I know that malarkey about how god only took representatives and not every species. You know the folly of the flood story and you are trying to come up with a more plausible story. genesis says that the boat held two of all flesh. That means every fucking critter on earth. If you are ashamed of your own bible, deal with it.

And where did you get that shit about "breathing through the nostrils? genesis says all the animals who had the breath of life. In other words, all that breathed. I am quoting, both times, the king james.

You fail to see the difference between and argument and an explaination. Let me illustrate: People who think the earth is 6000 years old know that there are stars a hell of a lot farther away than 6000 light-years. They say: when god made the earth and the stars, he also made the light between them.

Get it? They know the foolishness of the genesis story, so they come up with a better story.

Let me repeat myself. You are missing the goddamned point. I don't care if you have the flood on videotape narrated by Dan Rather. You will not convince me that there is a supreme being who is nothing less than a monster.

And what was that nonsense about maybe Mt Everest not existing at the time of the flood. I must have misunderstood you. That is the most asinine thing I've ever heard.

One more thing: all you people who want to prove the truth of the bible, go and find me the tower of babel.


Blogger Jim Arvo said...
Hi Charles,

I'm going to forego the discussion of Noah's ark if you don't mind. To me it's rather like arguing whether Thomas the Tank Engine could really pull Annie the Coach up a steep mountain.

You said "There is nor ever has been any such thing as a 'simple life form' This is a simple untruth. All life is and always has been complex."

Really?! The world of biochemistry must be abuzz with anticipation of your findings. Please tell us which peer-reviewed scientific journal you will publish this in. I'd love to read it. Seriously... what basis do you have for that assertion? Anything?

Charles: "The fossil records show a sudden appearance of complex lifeforms with no preceeding type."

The Vendian period, which predates the Cambrian, shows simple worm-like creatures and mats of algae-like organisms; nothing more. Organisms need to have some minimum structure in order to be preserved in the fossil record. Unfortunately, isolated single-cell creatures leave no fossils.

Charles: "Lets consider what is being proposed, that by random chance processes (mutations)over aeons of time complex life came from simple life. Ok is this rational?"

I suggest you first attempt to understand what is actually being proposed. What you've stated here is the typical creationist claptrap, which totally disregards the role of natural selection. If you leave that out, all you have is "random chance", which is rather like leaving the wings off an airplane and scoffing that it will never fly.

Charles: "...it is proposed that ultimately we are descended from a rock, from goo being hit by lightening etc . Now some things we do know and are fundemental laws of nature. We do not get order from chaos......ever."

Your arguments and vocabulary show that you've gotten your material solely from creationist propaganda. Have you no interest in learning some actual science? All of your "arguments" thus far as simply appeals to indignation and they show no curiosity whatsoever. As for order out of chaos, yes, it happens all the time. Put a tablespoon of sugar in a glass of water and let it dissolve. What you have is total "chaos" as there is no structure to the sugar molecules whatsoever. Now let the water evaporate. What do you see? Crystals, which are *highly* ordered. It must be a miracle! If you would like a list of other such miracles, I'll be happy to provide it.

Charles: "All systems always degenerate or devolve they do not go to higher levels of complexity by themselves ......ever"

Sorry, that is flat out wrong. You might as well trot out that old canard of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Surely you've read in your creationist propaganda that evolution violates thermodynamics, right? All such claims are based on fundamental misunderstandings that an inquisitive 2nd grader can see through. I'll simply cite crystal growth and self-assembling organic molecules, of which there are thousands.

Charles: "The whole question of the Bible authority rests upon the creation, is it rational in the light of what we know about biochemistry for instance to suppose that life originated by accident ? of course not..."

I'm not going to address that question directly--at least for now--because there is a larger issue at play here, Charles. You ask "Is it rational?", yet on what basis do you propose to supply the answer? It appears that you think naive intuition, or incredulity, is a trustworthy guide (perhaps augmented by the pseudo-science of creationism). Please tell me how much effort you've expended in learning ANYTHING at all about the science involved. That would be virtually zero, right? Does THAT seem reasonable to you? To make profound scientific pronouncements without knowing a thing about science? Please, spare us. (Weren't you the one urging us to study the facts before making judgments? Aren't you being a tad hypocritical?)


Blogger John of Indiana said...
"prior to the Flood it had never rained at all".

Isn't that a physical impossibility? water evaporates, the vapour rises, condenses in the cooler up levels, the vapour gathers together into drops, and the rain falls. If it had never rained, the people of Noah's time must have busted their asses hauling water to irrigate with.
And the "Earth was raised up and the water ran off"? I'd like to see an explanation of how that happens with a shpere the size of this planet. and no fair saying "gawd didditt!"

And Charles, The Google is a lot like Alice's Restaurant. you can get ANYTHING you want, including bullshit to back up whatever bullshit you want. But, hey! Thanks for the T-shirt idea you just gave me:
"The Google said it, I believe it, that settles it!"


Blogger Jim Arvo said...
Charles said "...anyone can google this stuff just type proof of noahs flood or problems with radio dating etc"

Just out of curiosity, Charles, have you also tried Googling "problems with noah's flood" or "proof of radio dating"? I'm guessing that's a "no", right? If so, then I presume that what you're actually urging all of us to do is to carefully search all the facts that we know a priori we will agree with. Sorry, but that's a recipe for self-deception.


Blogger THE ACE said...
"It is he who sitteth on the circle of the earth." And this proves the people of the Old Testament believed the earth was round?A circle can be flat. Just put a quarter or any coin on a table and you'll see a circle that
is very flat indeed.

And for John of Indiana..how dare
you question the earth being lifted up and the water running off? As all right-thinking people
know, the god Atlas holds the earth on his shoulders. If he decided to raise it up a bit so it would empty all that water, well,
that's just what happened!

Long live Atlas! Glorrreee!


Blogger ryan said...
I overlooked something I wanted to joke about. Charles said that before the flood it didn't rain and that there were no plants. He is getting this from genesis 2, which many "scholars" call the second account of creation. The story takes place before adam and before eden.

The aforementioned scholars need to say that 2 accounts are given, because genesis 1 says that plants existed. Apparently they think they are resolving a contradiction, but they are still left with 2 different stories. In the 2nd story, plants and animals make their appearance after adam.

charles, which story is the real story? If you favor the second story, are you telling us that it didn't rain from creation to noah?

Be careful about quoting the bible around atheists. We know the bible better than xristians. That is why we are atheists.


Oh lordy Charles!, are you ready for this?!

I've just googled the words 'Islam is the only true religion', and well, it's been quite a revelation I can tell you!


Blogger boomSLANG said...
In his original article, "Charles" said...if evolution is true then the Bible is not[true].

To which I responded, "precisely!", and further pointed out that evolution is both theory, and fact; there is no "if".

I elaborated further with a similar analogy ..."if it is true that the earth is spherical in shape, then the bible is not true"

Charles responds with...

The Bible has this to say about the shape of the earth
'It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth' so not flat then and
'He spreads out the northern skies over empty space;
he suspends the earth over nothing' (in space )


Dear Charles,

Similar to how a square is not a cube, a "circle" is not a "sphere". If a second grader can know the difference, then I believe that I'm being perfectly rational in expecting the "Creator of the Universe" to know it, as well.

In any event, I've included some more biblical passages, passages by which we can logically infer that the suggestion is that of a non-spherical earth:

- Daniel 4:10-11: "The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth:"

and...

- Revelations 7:1: "After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth"

and...

- Matthew 4:8: "Once again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in their glory."

Are the above-quoted passages that of a perfect, infinitely wise "God"?...or ignorant, superstitious men?

To review, you asked me to question "sincerely"(thanks for that, BTW, it would've never occured to me to do that)

Well, in conclusion, I sincerely believe the bible was authored by men, not a "God".

Best regards.


Blogger sconnor said...
Charles said,
"I have noticed this technique a lot especially with reference to Noah's ark and the flood. For instance Noah did not have to take every living thing but only those that breathed through their nostrils and only the 'kind' not every variant and yet despite this scoffers produce huge lists of the millions of creatures ignoring what the Bible says on the matter."

Try again Charles. Scripture says god will destroy all flesh that has the breath of life (that's a plethora of creatures). Everything under heaven and is of the earth, shall die. If Noah didn't bring the millions of animals on the ark, where did they come from, later?

Ge 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

Does destroying "all flesh" mean destroying "all flesh", or not? Does this include whales -- they are made of flesh?

You can also add to the myriad of creatures because of this verse in scripture.

Ge 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth,

And of EVERYTHING THAT CREEPETH UPON THE EARTH. That's a lot of creatures.

Honestly, Charles what grade are you in?

--S.


Blogger charles said...
Yes I was in fact brought up like everyone else - with the naturalistic theories of the origins of life and uniformitarian theories about the history of the planet and used to read popular science mags and books and tv progs and enjoyed them too but i started to change my mind when a atheist friend told me that none of these things were known to be fact and often theories were changed. I eventually learned that the whole edifice was based on a particular interpretation of the evidence and that the same evidence could be used to support the Bible only with a lot less holes. I learned that coal and oil do not take millions of years to form and that the fossil record does not show evolution at all what it shows is creatures reproducing after their kind consistently with no changes to another kind and that after many years there were still no authentic transitional types when there should have been many. The 400 million year old jellyfish, frog fern or whatever were still recognisable as those of today. The fossil record can be equally and in my view more satisfactorily explained by hydrological sorting, weight and mobility in the light of a flood and of course it is catastrophic, there is a general sorting yes certainly but its not uniform, it is catastrophic and jumbled.

I know that many people will know the Bible well and better than me no doubt but to answer ryans question the reference you asked for there are a few others but here is one

'Come now, let us reason together,
says the LORD:
though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
thought they are red like crimson,
they shall become like wool."
- Isaiah 1:18

Yes faith is important and thats all i ever heard but in the first instance to the big question is there a God at all, no faith is required to reach a conclusion on this

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse Romans 1

what about all the animals and people that were killed ? Id just like to point out here that I wasnt there but the Bible says that 'the earth was filled with violence ' so God decided to destroy the old world - i would like to point out that Noah preached and warned about the flood and some presumably could have avoided it by joining him since the ark was a very large vessel. In every catastrophe in the Bible there is always a way out provided.
I just saw your last post yes it says it never rained from creation to Noah it says that the earth was watered by springs and a mist the mist suggests to me maybe condensation or a humid climate, or in any case an absence of the hydrological cycle that we know today point being I have to bend my understanding to what it says rather than the other way around and see if I can come up with another (rational) expalnation

Ok boomslang quotes passages which he says teaches the earth is flat, well i dont thjink they explicitly teach that at all people still often use the phrase four corners of the earth without being flat earthers. You can read them that way if you presuppose that is the teaching

Jimarvo
I stand by what i said about so called 'simple life forms' this is a total cop out by people who presumably want to explain away the complexity of living organisms. One cell of one of these worms is way more complex than anything we can make even with the knowlege we now have

Check this wikipedia entry for the bacteria flegellum (if you can handle it !)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellum

yes your right aspentroll but thanks for the input !

The evidence for the flood (and it is evidence) means the the God of the Bible is not the helpmate thru life that many religeous organisations promote. This is the creator and he owns the shop - He describes Himself as merciful yes and He is but also indignant, wrathfull, jealous for his people, taking vengence and making judgement, powerful, wise and having knowlege to an infinite degree.
We are warned ! and yes He does kill people at a time and in a way preordained unless they turn
to whit:
Psalm 7
God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day.
If he turn not, he will whet his sword; he hath bent his bow, and made it ready.
He hath also prepared for him the instruments of death; he ordaineth his arrows against the persecutors.

Everyone here knows the issues I dont need to quote the Bible, sorry I already have

Anyway, yes i feared God from what I learned and truly repented and gladly took the salvation offered but the start was realizing that first and foremost He was the creator with sovreignty over the earth and life did not come by accident.


Blogger charles said...
jim arvo, your crystal experiment does not involve life, it is a reproducible experiment with a repeatable end so it is science

The whole question of the Bible authority rests upon the creation, is it rational in the light of what we know about biochemistry for instance to suppose that life originated by accident ? of course not..."

I'm not going to address that question directly

go ahead, can you provide a real example example of any living organism which has changed from a 'simple' state to a more complex ? As far as I know all observed changes involve a loss of information never a gain which is precisely what is required for evolution to take place


Blogger dunany77 said...
"Anyway, yes i feared God from what I learned and truly repented and gladly took the salvation offered but the start was realizing that first and foremost He was the creator with sovreignty over the earth and life did not come by accident."

So I guess you'll be packing for North Korea or Iran to go and preach the word eh? That is the commandment from your god isn't it?....hello?....Chuck??......


Blogger webmdave said...
An encapsulation of Charles' "theory":

I don't comprehend how life could exist without supernatural intervention, therefore the Bible is true.

Does that about sum things up?

Well, even if we were to scrap all scientific theories, the Bible doesn't become true by default. But for the sake of discussion, let's assume that some undefined, incomprehensible, immaterial, invisible, extar-dimensional, self-existent, super-powerful life form invaded real space and made weird stuff happen. How exactly did this God do these things? What process did she use? What mechanism did it use to make substance magically appear out of nothing? Or is these things part of those unsearchable mysteries we've all heard so much about? And if these are unsearchable mystery with no natural explanations, then saying God did it while appearing to explain things, actually explains nothing. What the Christian perspective does is stop inquiry. If I believe that existence is one of the unsearchable mysteries of God, then there is no reason to look into it at all! Science is a waste of time!

Do you really want to go back to praying for people with the plague? Isn't modern SCIENTIFIC medicine preferable? The Internet, the form of communication we are using now, wasn't birthed in church. Electricity is more than judgment rained down from the sky; it's a force of nature that we've harnessed.

If all the world saw things like Charles, all inquiry into the nature of reality would cease on the altar of ignorant superstition. We did that. It was called the Dark Ages. It was stupid. Let's not do it again.

Christians accuse non-theists of believing that the universe and all life magically poofed into existence. Those same Christians turn around and preach that everything did indeed poof into existence, magically, by the will some mysterious non-reality-obeying entity. Then they sagely point and say, "Look around -- God exists!"

It's circular reasoning to say the universe exists because God made it and the existence of the universe proves that God exists.

Think about it Charles. Then take an aspirin.


Blogger charles said...
No worse than that mate im posting on here !

No I read the webmasters testimony and I thought whats happened here this man was dedicated and sincere (must stop using that word im wearing it out )he decided after so many years that it wasnt true so i thought that is an unhappy story indeed, maybe something foundational was missing. I know this will sound patronising but its the best i can do. There are maybe other people on this site who are very dissapointed with their experience and i thought what made the difference to me what made it real instead of a load of 'stuff' that people told me and so i wanted to share that hoping it might have some value.

Today Jesus is preached as some kind of lifestyle choice, as a helpmate thru life and all kinds of sickly sweet humanist compromises to persuade but thinking people (like on this site)realise that these things are not true in the experience of their own life.

Ask Jesus into your heart they say
This is NOT what the Bible teaches
Jesus said 'no man comes to the Father except by me and no man comes to me except the Father call him' God decides so it makes more sense for a person to petition God in the name of the Son for the neccessarys for salvation and Jesus promises 'I will in no wise turn anyone away '
In any case the Bible teaches something different we dont have a choice ! We are commanded to repent and believe the idea of choosing and 'free will' doesnt sit in my view with what the Bible teaches.


OpenID avie_redmoon said...
I took your advice years before it was given, thank you very much. My search has been nothing but sincerity, study and honest soul-searching.

Just because the answers I've found for myself don't mesh with your answers, it doesn't mean I'm not being sincere. I really get sick of people saying, "You didn't reach the same conclusion as me? You're not doing it right! Pray again! Pray harder!" Uh, no. I'm done. We're individuals, with individual brains, not a hive mind. We are going to arrive at different conclusions.


Blogger stronger now said...
Charles(uncle john is that you?)

I must inform you that if the situation you are describing took place that there wouldn't be anything still alive.

The amount of energy released during the global volcanic eruptions/formation and global mountain development/plate tectonic activity would have realeased enough energy to heat all of the water to above normal cooking temperatures at least. Noah would have been poached.

http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/flood-problems.html

But you don't seemed too concerned with actual physics or reality. It's a miracle after all.

"I have to bend my understanding to what it says..."

So...no real sincerity in your "search" then is there.

Also, if there were no climatic zones how did arctic dwelling creatures get their ability to survive there? Did they evolve?


Blogger stronger now said...
"As far as I know all observed changes involve a loss of information never a gain which is precisely what is required for evolution to take place"

Nylon eating bacteria. There is a bacteria that developed the ability to consume an unnatural man made by-product of nylon manufacture. It was a frame shift mutation giving rise to new "information".


Blogger charles said...
I don't comprehend how life could exist without supernatural intervention, therefore the Bible is true.

not really dave, thanks for putting my post where it should be by the way i think i put it on the testimonys page before.

your statement presupposes that i find the creation incomprehensible which i did before but obviously not now which i appreciate from your viewpoint is circular reasoning, however the naturalistic explanations are not adequate either the origins of the universe and life are not comprehended by 'orthodox' science especially when we start to look more closely at the organisation of life itself.
Now real science to my mind is science that produces results and that means paid commercial science to produce as you say medicines and useful things. Evolutionary thinking contributes nothing to these areas - in fact i would argue that it hinders progress and as you may know the founders of modern science such as
da vinci
copernicus
pascal
boyle
newton
humphrey davey
farraday and many others
were all Bible believers with a self confessed interest in learning about the creation
some of them were also preachers so i dont think its fair to say that the Bible and science are incompatible and God having given us reason would surely want us to use it for our benefit ?
Belief in a creator has exited my interest in subjects I had no interest in before - how is all this done i wanted to know, i appreciate that i live in the age of the electron microscope and the Konowlege of DNA (definitely no accident)
If all the information was removed from your computer it would weigh the same would it not ?
And likewise if all the information was removed from our bodies they would indstantly dissolve into gloop shouldnt what we now know be evidence of a vastly intelligent creator ? There is no chance that these mechabisms can arise by random chance processes none at all
The idea that it has flies in the face of reason and indeed the laws of nature which we have spent so many years learning


Blogger Dogmeat said...
Charles, I'm guessing by your description of the bacterial flagellum that you are a Michael Behe fan. Did you know that he refuses to present a falsifiable scientific hypothesis to prove his claims, saying that he's "too busy"? Too busy to submit his so-called evidence to the scientific method, yet he's more than happy to call his personal beliefs scientific.

The simple fact is that evolution has withstood over a century of scientific peer-review attempting to disprove it, but like all valid theories this has only increased its credibility. As new discoveries were made such as genetics the data coming in has been consistent with evolution, instead of discrediting it the data has simply refined the process by which it works.

If creationists truly have irrefutable evidence of a global flood or a six thousand year old earth, please tell them to stop messing around and present a falsifiable hypothesis to a peer-reviewed journal, if what they say is true they will become Nobel prize winners and save BILLIONS of souls. And if it's not true, at least they will have what they need to seek out the truth. What's there to lose?


Blogger charles said...
stronger now can you expand on this 'new information ' got a link id like to check it out for myself

'Nylon eating bacteria. There is a bacteria that developed the ability to consume an unnatural man made by-product of nylon manufacture. It was a frame shift mutation giving rise to new "information".'


Blogger charles said...
dogmeat, thanks for checking the link, whats the real issue here ?
that michael behe ( i forgot his name) doesnt submit a peer reviewed article -for whatever reason maybe you can tell me why ? or the improbability of the bacterium flagellum (just one example of hundreds) coming about by chance. I would say the latter is much more worthy of discussion.
Now im only a layman but i understand for the cell to be produced the proteins must be manufactured by the DNA in a chain which then according to the exact sequence of proteins forms itself into the required shape which is then a part of a motor ?! that is the easy bit, it has to be produced in the correct sequence as there is no where to put it, it must be produced and then placed and the next item then built to complete the motor which has around 40 working parts - that is the issue not wether MB is at loggerheads with the sciebtific establishment because maybe he has some infoirmation they cant deal with


Blogger sconnor said...
Charles? Any comments from my post about 12 post up?

--S.


Blogger stronger now said...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nylon_eating_bacteria


http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=345072


Blogger charles said...
dogmeat,


If creationists truly have irrefutable evidence of a global flood or a six thousand year old earth, please tell them to stop messing around and present a falsifiable hypothesis to a peer-reviewed journal, if what they say is true they will become Nobel prize winners and save BILLIONS of souls. And if it's not true, at least they will have what they need to seek out the truth. What's there to lose?


there are more than a few sites which have a lot of information on evidence for the flood try CRI for one but nobody on either side has 'irrefutable proof' despite any claims and a sceptical look at the claims for human ancestry will reveal in short order an account of fraud and deception entire men being supposed from a pigs tooth for instance. We have a brain we dont need secondhand opinions do we ? We can assess the evidence for ourselves I suggest that peer reviewed ' journals are not neccessarily the unbiased disinterested organs the general public supposes them to be when robert gentry found evidence in polonium halos in granite which indicated the granite had been formed instantly he published for a short period until the establishment realised the implication then he couldnt publish in his 'peer reviewed' journals


all the best im off now thanks for engaging me in discussion


Blogger stronger now said...
http://www.nmsr.org/nylon.htm


Blogger stronger now said...
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/


Blogger stronger now said...
What? Your leaving? WTF!

You never answered my other questions.

Too hard for you?


Blogger webmdave said...
Charles, supernatural is INCOMPREHENSIBLE! Since you and I and everyone else reading these words are natural participants in the natural universe, NONE OF US CAN COMPREHEND SUPERNATURAL!

I realize this is a nearly incomprehensible idea to those whose minds have been molded by religious indoctrination and rhetoric, but IF we comprehend supernatural things, then those things are no longer SUPERnatural, but merely natural again.

Charles said, "Evolutionary thinking contributes nothing to these areas - in fact i would argue that it hinders progress and as you may know the founders of modern science such as..."

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Evolutionary thinking contributes greatly in the study of disease. The adaptation of species is clearly demonstrated by various diseases that mutate to overcome our medicines. And that's just the most simple aspect.

Of what possible use is the science of astronomy? Who cares if the planet is round or flat? There's no obvious commercial benefit to contradicting geocentric thinking, and your anti-evolutionist stance is as retarded as the anti-Copernicus crowd of past generations. Luther and Calvin argued that Joshua told the sun to stand still, therefore it is the sun that revolves around the earth and not the other way around as those evil mathematicians supposed.

The Roman Catholic Church, the largest denomination of Christianity, has completely accepted evolutionary theory. Did you know that? Only anti-intellectual fundamentalists are hanging on for dear life to superstitious ignorance.

Remember, folks. Christianity is not about personal religion, loving your neighbor, helping those in need, and living a privately chaste and moral life. No, Christianity is about propagating and mandating ignorance.


Blogger boomSLANG said...
Charles is back, with...Ok boomslang quotes passages which he says teaches the earth is flat..

Dear Charles,

Please notice, I said no such thing about the bible "teaching" anything; I would never suggest something so idiotic. Talking snakes? Walking cadavers? Giants? Fiery chariots? Please.

Now, what I have suggested, is that one can logically infer that the redactors of the bible wrote it from a perspective that the earth was non-spherical. Please review the provided scripture.

Charles continues...i dont [think] they explicitly teach that at all people still often use the phrase four corners of the earth without being flat earthers. >

Yes, yes...I'm perfectly aware that some people still use such figurative language. Thanks. But let me ask you---where do you suppose such figurative language originated? For instance, take, "Hey, the sun rises in the east, not the west!"

Now, do you suppose that primative, ignorant, uneducated man really knew the sun didn't move, and he was simply speaking figuratively? Or, do you suppose that since it appears that the sun "rises" with the naked eye, that that's precisley what man thought the sun actually did?..i.e..rise?

Charles continues...You can read them that way if you presuppose that is the teaching

Again, I would not rely on any such out-moded, out-dated relic, to teach anyone anything. The "poetic truths" that I'm sure you believe are found in "God's Word", are common sense "truths"....thou shalt not run around killing people at the drop of a hat. Really?...people frown on that?

Now, speaking of "presupposing"---even if you choose to ignore the infinite regress that a "Complex Creator" creates, and we hypothetically grant you your illusive, invisible "Architect" in the sky, where is the link between this guy, and the three-in-one, christian biblegod????

'Evidence, please.


Blogger charles said...
hello sconnor, God promised to destroy all the air breathing creatures on the earth so i guess that excludes the ones that swim in the sea such as dolphins and whales but many of them would have died too in the huge amounts of sediments and strong currents as the fossils testify. but it includes without exception everything that lived upon the the earth obviously excluding those in the ark So everything that was to survive went on the ark. Now i think personally that its likely that a lot of insects would have survived on floating vegetation but scripture does not say and anyway the creeping things went into the ark as well. But everything that breathed on the earth died yes. So i think what your question is concerned with is population growth post deluge which is an interesting and important area, what would the growth be to produce viable populations ? the only data i have concerns people but i think similar methods can be applied to animals here is one link
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i3/people.asp

The short answer is that only a modest and conventional percentage annual increase is requred to give us the population we have today.
I could turn this around and say if people have been around for as long as we are told where are they ? The population should be much larger and why does not recorded history go back more than 5000 yrs or so - why not 10 or 20 thousand ? where are all the graves ?
In connection with the pre floodpopulation this could have been vast, the Bible says the world was made to be inhabhited but today only 3 per cent is habitable and we have 6 billion ok after much longer time but still...

thanks for your questions no body ever asks me about this stuff.


Blogger charles said...
no stronger now gotta get to bed ! its midnight here !


Blogger charles said...
ok dave - commercial application of astronomy - navigation for hundred of years mate, trade and commerce, until the late 70's when i went to sea on catgo ships astronomy was the ONLY way to determine your position, we had almanacs which told us exactly what the sun and the stars were doing, we wouldnt have left home without them ! No GPS back then or in the millenia before.


'Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Evolutionary thinking contributes greatly in the study of disease. The adaptation of species is clearly demonstrated by various diseases that mutate to overcome our medicines. And that's just the most simple aspect. '

yes its the adaptation of a species NOT new variety geddit ?


The roman catholic church the 'largest denomination of christianity '

Ha ! give me a break where in the Bible does it say we should worship the 'mother of heaven' ? no where mate as you know better than I, you may also recall in jeremiah that God is infuriated with the women of Israel for baking bread to offer to 'the mother of heaven' Pagan idolatory left over from idol worship in ancient Babylon
priests forgiving sins ? no way a sure ticket to hell
The pope as Christ representative on earth ? simple heresy
There are i suppose some true believers contained within the catholic church but very few i suspect and as for its doctrine the above ..nuff said


Blogger charles said...
dave,

yes its the adaptation of a species NOT new variety geddit ?

mistake, should read :

NOT new species

it is in fact of course a new variety


Blogger charles said...
The Roman Catholic Church, the largest denomination of Christianity, has completely accepted evolutionary theory. Did you know that? Only anti-intellectual fundamentalists are hanging on for dear life to superstitious ignorance.

The catholic church accepting evolution is no suprise


Blogger charles said...
stronger now, after providing theories only to trash gentry even h