posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 02:10 PM
reply to post by sheepslayer247
What really stood out to me was the guy that asked "where do you derive objective meaning in life?". I think that's a decent question. The next
picture says "I think we should take advice on modern living from a bronze age mythology".
In my uneducated agnostic opinion, thats just a low blow.
And whats the real purpose behind this, to debate and show facts or to belittle them?
Yeah actually, not a bad question…
Context is important. If the question is rhetorical, and implies that we can derive objective meaning from the bible, then take all the facts
surrounding the bible and historical period it was created. If the comment implies we can find objective meaning in the bible, it's actually kind of
Here is an example of the questions being
taken seriously and answered seriously.
In any case, if anyone thinks these all are "low blows"…
This girl after sitting through the debate decides to post this picture. OH WOW, EVOLUTION TOTALLY DISPROVED.
Simply acknowledging the fossil record however, goes against the belief that the world only existed 6000 years. This and many other points were failed
to be addressed by Ham in the debate.
...and when you run into a roadblock, "Oh, well that's god that did that."
Just like Ham, smug comments …
The mocking of the comments are more appropriate than a serious answer. Since as we see nothing can be "official proof" besides a book you read,
translated into english, from a couple millennia ago... based on other myths, promoted under political and personal power grabs in ancient times.
No low blows, just mocking people mocking facts.
Watch the debate first, and ask yourself why someone would decide to jump up and post these online…
edit on 11-2-2014 by boncho because: (no