Pell says Adam and Eve didn't exist

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Garfee

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Garfee

 

The context was attacking the integrity of the Word of God as it's written.
Dude, believe whatever you want to, my point was this is nothing new, not by a long shot.

It's not the word of god until god says it is, right in front of me.

That's included in "believe whatever you want."

Was it okay for Hitler to believe that all non-aryans should be wiped off the planet? To believe that Allah said to kill the infidels? Is it okay to believe that women are inferior? Not only is it wrong to believe in such things, it is also wrong to sit by and let these beliefs infect the entire world.

What are you talking about? We're talking about Genesis 1. People don't get killed because I believe Adam and Eve existed. That's absurd. When you don't have an argument always associate your opponent to Hitler. Does anyone know if this has ever been tried before?

edit on 11-4-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

You made a blanket statement about how anyone can believe anything they want. This wasn't specific to believing in adam and eve.

reply to post by Deetermined

Sorry, based on the questions I saw, it only shows that the person asking the questions didn't understand what the Bible said.

Just an example, your link makes it sound like it wasn't possible for plants, trees or vegetation to survive or grow because they were created on the 3rd day of creation and God didn't put the sun or the moon in the sky until the 4th day.

What it overlooks is the fact that God created light and separated it from darkness ...

I'm gonna ask again, since the only "evidence" you list is the bible...how do you know these things really happened? What's your objective evidence?

Oh, and we know for a FACT that plants evolved AFTER the sun...mostly because without the sun earth wouldn't have formed in the first place. So we know for a FACT that the bible's "sun after plants" claim is 100% wrong.

Originally posted by RyanFromCan
reply to post by Deetermined

 

Yes, and they are all based on the biblical quotes, there is nothing there beyond faith alone to "prove" anything. What I am saying is, there has to be more than supporting evidence from the bible for many people to accept it, especially when you are dealing with passages that are highly improbable in today's world.

I have a copy of "Hunger games" beside me, and I could tell you what is in it is true, and if you question any of it, I could say "but the book says!" then go find some in-depth review of the book, and use it as back up, when truly, the only source for the book, and it's review, is the book itself. Where is the independent evidence?

Agree! What boggles the mind is that most religious believers can tell you that 2+2=4. They understand this because the EVIDENCE of two oranges plus two oranges equals four oranges. If someone were to suggest to them that 2+2=59, they would say how ridiculous it is, and demand that this be proven. But when it comes to being told that there's a god, a devil, a virgin birth, that a dead man three days rotting in the grave was brought back to life, and they believe it with NO evidence at all? This is beyond childish, it's insane!

reply to post by jiggerj


Honestly, I have no idea why people of ancient times held sacrifices as a form of worship, but they did. Animal sacrifices did not start with God. From what I gather, it started during the times of ancient gods and idol worship, but God did not order them to do away with it, but he did put laws and limits into place for how it was continued to be done.

The Jews or Romans did not kill Jesus as a form of sacrifice. They only thought they were punishing Jesus for stating that he was the Son of God. God told the Jews that He was going to send them a Messiah and when Jesus showed up, the majority didn't believe Him. God turned Jesus into a sacrifice for them (and for the rest of humanity), without them realizing it. Jesus told his apostles about God's ultimate plan of sending him as a sacrifice, but Jesus spent most of His time preaching to others about God and left it to his apostles to spread the word about His death after He was gone. After Jesus' death, He rose from the grave and visited His apostles to tell them to spread the word about life after death and how his own death led the way for this to happen. Otherwise, there would not have been life after death for humans. It wasn't until Jesus proved life after death to them that He had them preach about it and how it came to be. It took a perfect sacrifice to eliminate sin so that we could all have eternal life.

Originally posted by MrXYZ

I'm gonna ask again, since the only "evidence" you list is the bible...how do you know these things really happened? What's your objective evidence?

Oh, and we know for a FACT that plants evolved AFTER the sun...mostly because without the sun earth wouldn't have formed in the first place. So we know for a FACT that the bible's "sun after plants" claim is 100% wrong.

That's why I rely on the Bible, because no one knows the FACTS about anything. Unless you can show me a human who existed and was witness to life before the earth and the sun, you have no way of knowing this for sure. Yes, you can say plants evolved because of the sun, but you can't say that they were created by the sun.

Once again, you weren't paying attention. The Bible said there was light before anything else was created and you have absolutely no idea if those plants could have survived in God's light versus sun light. There is no way for humans to know. Humans didn't create them.

reply to post by jiggerj


There's a difference between no evidence at all and being blind to the evidence that's put before you. Most people will turn a blind eye to evidence that they don't understand.

reply to post by Deetermined


I am sorry, but I can't help myself on this one, and going to be completely irreverent:

I can't help but wonder sometimes if the disciples just got really drunk partaking in "the blood of Christ" at the last supper, and did not sober up for 3 days, that might explain the resurrection story.

reply to post by RyanFromCan


You're giving yourself away on your true beliefs and they don't have anything to do with Christianity.

What do you really practice anyway? Are you a student of religion?

reply to post by Deetermined

That's why I rely on the Bible, because no one knows the FACTS about anything. Unless you can show me a human who existed before the earth and the sun, you have no way of knowing this for sure. Yes, you can say plants evolved because of the sun, but you can't say that they were created by the sun.

Hence, science. Science can go back in history and give us a picture of a moment in history, going back millions of years, the Good book only gos back a thousand give or take a few centuries, and is of questionable accuracy as far as being literally factual.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by jiggerj

 

There's a difference between no evidence at all and being blind to the evidence that's put before you. Most people will turn a blind eye to evidence that they don't understand.

Yes, I agree, reminds me of fundamental radical Christians demanding the removal of evolutionary teaching,, and replacing it with creationism, in science in schools.

reply to post by RyanFromCan


And science's way of dating doesn't have inaccuracies? Sorry, to much proof of that does exist.

There is no absolute proof that anything dates back millions of years. Science adjusts it's timelines and dating techniques every time they're proven wrong to try and make it right again.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by RyanFromCan

 

You're giving yourself away on your true beliefs and they don't have anything to do with Christianity.

What do you really practice anyway? Are you a student of religion?

edit on 11-4-2012 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)

No, the only thing I am showing is that I am not a blind, unthinking follower, I am showing that I have the brain and sense of humour God blessed me with, and actually use it, and do not rely on just what I am told to believe unquestioningly, by some guy who sees himself as morally superior, even if they are sinning under their robes in the cloisters.

Originally posted by Deetermined
There is no absolute proof that anything dates back millions of years.

Sure there is, you just choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit in with the numerous lies the bible tells you, that you believe anyway.

There is a reason non religious people tend to have higher IQs than religious ones.

reply to post by RyanFromCan


Creation and evolution can co-exist to a point, but evolution can't explain what sparked creation before the evolution process began. Likewise, science isn't even remotely close in figuring out human DNA.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by RyanFromCan

 

Creation and evolution can co-exist to a point, but evolution can't explain what sparked creation before the evolution process began.

Oh so the only logical conclusion is "god did it,"

not that life could be a fundamental property of the universe in the first place.
Makes sense.

Originally posted by RyanFromCan

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by RyanFromCan

 

You're giving yourself away on your true beliefs and they don't have anything to do with Christianity.

What do you really practice anyway? Are you a student of religion?

edit on 11-4-2012 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)

No, the only thing I am showing is that I am not a blind, unthinking follower, I am showing that I have the brain and sense of humour God blessed me with, and actually use it, and do not relying on just what I am told to believe unquestioningly, by some guy who sees himself as morally superior, even if they are sinning under their robes in the cloisters.

Then you're missing the fundamental basis behind Christianity. Faith.

reply to post by Deetermined


There is more proof that the earth is millions of years old, than that the Bible is literally true.

Yes, carbon dating Is not an exact science, but a few thousand years +/- the age of the earth is just a sneeze in the ripples of time.

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by Deetermined
There is no absolute proof that anything dates back millions of years.

Sure there is, you just choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit in with the numerous lies the bible tells you, that you believe anyway.

There is a reason non religious people tend to have higher IQs than religious ones.

edit on 4-11-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)

Prove it. Provide me a scientific link showing that science has perfected radiocarbon dating and that it isn't affected by heat, thereby changing the outcome.

Originally posted by Deetermined

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by Deetermined
There is no absolute proof that anything dates back millions of years.

Sure there is, you just choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit in with the numerous lies the bible tells you, that you believe anyway.

There is a reason non religious people tend to have higher IQs than religious ones.

edit on 4-11-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)

Prove it. Provide me a scientific link showing that science has perfected radiocarbon dating and that it isn't affected by heat, thereby changing the outcome.

Because it may be off a few thousand years, does not take away the fact that there is evidence of things millions of years old, including fossils, rock, and hell, there are even trees still alive that are older than what the bible claims the Earth is.

Science has proven this, but has not proven ANYTHING claimed in the bible.
Looks as if you lose.

reply to post by Deetermined

Then you're missing the fundamental basis behind Christianity. Faith.

No, I have faith, just not ignorant, unthinking, blind to reality faith that depends on other peoples interpretations and impressions of Biblical teachings to base my beliefs on. I use the gifts that God gave me to look at the world, with the curious eyes of a child, and an open mind.