Wow

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
hey Biffy Clyro, I make perfect sense, you dont need to agree with the things i say, but
at least they are rational.

Don't you mean perfect nonsense? Just kidding. Praise the Lord! 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
Thanks for your vote of confidence in me. But even though Dasa presented the
information somewhat crudely, it brings home the point quite well.

If you think that then you are as stupid as he is.

Originally posted by RJHinds
This is why I say Atheism is a religion and evolution is the main doctrine because
one has to have a tremendous amount of faith to believe it.

Evidence and logic based conclusions are not faith nor religion.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You said it yourself. Dasa just revealed how moronic and delusional your
evolution doctrine of Atheism happens to be. Sorry guy, you have been busted
by the most unlikely of persons. HalleluYah !!! 😏

“...Dasa just revealed how moronic and delusional your
evolution doctrine of Atheism happens to be. ...”

how so? He just said a load of crap -no reason, no evidence, just stupid crap.
you and him are both morons.

Originally posted by RJHinds
To hypothesise on what you could and would do if you were God is stupid, since
you do not have the mind of God and apparently have no idea of his plan or purpose
in creation.

No, it is not stupid to think what you would do if you where a 'God' that had human interest in mind for it is one of the valid ways of seeing if the God-hypothesis makes any sense.
If what you see in this world, by any stretch of the imagination, does not tally with how you would design the world if you were a 'God' and had human interest in mind and if you also see aspects of this world that clearly are pointless or even illogical ( pointless or illogical for human interests in mind ) then that is evidence against a 'God' designing this world.
You say stellspalfie does not know God's purpose but I presume you believe that at least one purpose this 'God' has involves having human interests in mind? If so, then we can at least see if that purpose makes any sense when we look at the structure of our world and we can only do that by imagining what intelligent design oneself would make if oneself were, hypothetically, just such a 'God'. And when we do this we find the God-hypothesis makes no sense for we would inevitably make many things very different. How else can we rationally judge if this God-hypothesis makes any sense? ( -apart from using Occam’s razor which, by the way, would imply it is an unnecessary hypothesis. But that is a different point )

Originally posted by humy
No, it is not stupid to think what you would do if you where a 'God' that had human interest in mind for it is one of the valid ways of seeing if the God-hypothesis makes any sense.
If what you see in this world, by any stretch of the imagination, does not tally with how you would design the world if you were a 'God' and had human interest in mind and if you a ...[text shortened]... he way, would imply it is an unnecessary hypothesis. But that is a different point )

Please don't feed the troll.

--- Penguin.

Originally posted by humy
No, it is not stupid to think what you would do if you where a 'God' that had human interest in mind for it is one of the valid ways of seeing if the God-hypothesis makes any sense.
If what you see in this world, by any stretch of the imagination, does not tally with how you would design the world if you were a 'God' and had human interest in mind and if you a he way, would imply it is an unnecessary hypothesis. But that is a different point )

Okay. I still think it is stupid, but if I were God I would have my own interest in
mind. Why should I care about the human's interests if they conflict with my
own? I would just wipe out all of those that were not going along with my
purpose in a world-wide flood.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Okay. I still think it is stupid, but if I were God I would have my own interest in
mind. Why should I care about the human's interests if they conflict with my
own? I would just wipe out all of those that were not going along with my
purpose in a world-wide flood.

Such a benevolent God......

Originally posted by RJHinds
You said it yourself. Dasa just revealed how moronic and delusional your
evolution doctrine of Atheism happens to be. Sorry guy, you have been busted
by the most unlikely of persons. HalleluYah !!! 🙄

and i'll give you the same advice i gave dasa. get yourself an education then come back to talk about it.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I would guess it is your education that is lacking if you believe all that crap.

evolution is not a doctrine that demands belief. it is a self-evident observation. it demands only reason and an education. these are two things you lack which disqualify you from commenting on the topic or any topic for that matter, including religion and spirituality.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Dasa is wrong about the perfect universe, however that was not his main point.
Anyway God has already promised to create a new Earth and heavens once we
are made perfect. HalleluYah !!!

The universe is perfect and so is everything else that can be perceived.

The thing is....... no one knows what perfection is.

If we experience an earth quake- then it is a perfect earth quake.

If we experience baldness - then we are experiencing perfect baldness.

If we are experiencing the moon moving away fro the earth - then we are experiencing a perfect moving away from earth of the moon.

Why do people think perfection is that only positive exists and negative does not.

Negativeness is a necessary phenomena to have a world of duality.

Without perfect negative occurrences the universe would not be perfect.

This foolish idea that nothing negative should exist is a ignorant idea created by fools.

Negative is the other side of positive......it must exist.

When you crash your car it is a perfect accident - created by the high speed and wet conditions you drive in...........and if you did not crash in those circumstances then that would be an imperfect result.

If you want to live in a place were you never crash cars or you never die...........then you must return home to the eternal spiritual world.

However in this temporary material world everything is perfect because it is obeying the law of cause and effect and duality.

The theory of evolution is accepted by fools and rascals who are thoroughly dishonest with their observations and conclusions.

Originally posted by Dasa
The universe is perfect and so is everything else that can be perceived.

The thing is....... no one knows what perfection is.

If we experience an earth quake- then it is a perfect earth quake.

If we experience baldness - then we are experiencing perfect baldness.

If we are experiencing the moon moving away fro the earth - then we are experiencing a ...[text shortened]... epted by fools and rascals who are thoroughly dishonest with their observations and conclusions.

this must mean that you're a perfect moron. makes sense now that i think about it.

Originally posted by Dasa
The universe is perfect and so is everything else that can be perceived.

The thing is....... no one knows what perfection is.

If we experience an earth quake- then it is a perfect earth quake.

If we experience baldness - then we are experiencing perfect baldness.

If we are experiencing the moon moving away fro the earth - then we are experiencing a ...[text shortened]... epted by fools and rascals who are thoroughly dishonest with their observations and conclusions.

Three of the four gospel writers quote Jesus to have said the following:

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." (Matthew 24:35 NKJV)

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." (Mark 13:31 NKJV)

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." (Luke 21:33 NKJV)

Luke also quotes Jesus as saying the following:

“The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached,
and everyone is pressing into it. And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for
one tittle of the law to fail. (Luke 16:16-17 NKJV)

The other Gospel writer sees a vision in his old age given to him by Christ and written down in
the book of Revelation and this is one of the last things he sees:

Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away.
Also there was no more sea. (Revelation 21:1 NKJV)

But it is obvious that he does not include the third Heaven where God is in this destruction
because of his later vision. So we can narrow the destruction down to the Earth we live on now,
and the first two heavens and everything in them.

The Apostle Peter writes in one of his letters the following and he must have learned it from Jesus:

But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire
until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. (2 Peter 3:7 NKJV)

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away
with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works
that are in it will be burned up. (2 Peter 3:10 NKJV)

God may have created a perfect universe to fulfill the first portion of His plan, but it is
obviously not perfect for the remainder of His plan. Otherwise, He would not destroy it with
fire and create a new Earth and heavens.

P.S. Christ knows what perfection is. HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! 😏

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
this must mean that you're a perfect moron. makes sense now that i think about it.

Persons who push evolution upon us without honestly observing their observations - and then return rude comments to defend there poor observations - only crystallize the fact that evolution is for fools and rascals.

How does the chicken lay its egg?

Did the chicken which didn't really look like a chicken in the beginning have a placenta birth long ago??? - and then after a long evolutionary time cycle decide to lay a quarter of an egg - and then much later on due to the evolutionary cycle lay a half an egg- and then over more time lay 3/4 of an egg - and then finally after even more time lay a full egg?

Or did it just start laying eggs from the beginning even when it didn't even look like a chicken......and if it did which came first the chicken or the egg?

Please explain?..........how the egg came into being slowly due to evolution and starting with its placenta birth from the beginning.......but then changing ever so slowly to the egg/shell birth we see today.

Did chickens know that the human race would want to collect billions of eggs at some point in time and decide it is better to lay eggs instead of placentas - so the humans can collect them and store them on their supermarkets shelves in the future?

Originally posted by Dasa
This is what evolution is all about in plain english.

There was nothing and then there was a big bang and something exploded.

Then the bits and pieces of that explosion turned into a perfect universe with a sun and earth and a moon and with perfect orbits and with gravity.

For some reason the earth had oceans and mountains and rivers and crops and frui ...[text shortened]... ent source........WOW amazing.

This is science today.

Mad crazy and dishonest to the core.

"There was nothing and then there was a big bang and something exploded."

How can something explode from nothing?

I think the big bang theory is a very plausible way of explaining how everything came into existence. First there was no universe or matter or time or space. Then God created space, matter and time. BANG!

Now here we are trying to explain it all.