On Creationism

[Buck]

"Created", how? And, "why"?

(those are just some questions -- they themselves do not imply any opinions, doubts ... whatsoever.)

[gosuruss]

ive come to the conclusion that religion threads are a waste of time. you can't convince people to change their beliefs when their logic does not follow any chain of reasoning. that coupled with the fact that not many people are willing to admit they are wrong makes it not a good use of time.

[r. mutt]

Originally Posted by gosuruss

ive come to the conclusion that Political threads are a waste of time. you can't convince people to change their beliefs when their logic does not follow any chain of reasoning. that coupled with the fact that not many people are willing to admit they are wrong makes it not a good use of time.

I changed a word in your post.

[Wigmeister General]

Originally Posted by gosuruss

ive come to the conclusion that religion threads are a waste of time. you can't convince people to change their beliefs when their logic does not follow any chain of reasoning. that coupled with the fact that not many people are willing to admit they are wrong makes it not a good use of time.

I agree with your conclusion but not your reasoning. Religious beliefs are founded on premises that must be true (e.g., the holy book of the religion is perfectly correct). Therefore, any evidence that appears to contradict an axiom of the religion is either dismissed or discounted. (For example, I recall many decades ago that skeptics questioned the gospels because there was no evidence that Pontius Pilate had ever existed; this "fact" was ignored or discounted. Interestingly, in 1964 an archaelogical discovery in Israel confirmed Pilate's existence and his position as Governor at the time of Jesus, thereby proving the skeptics wrong in this instance.)

[SamTheEagle]

Originally Posted by Wigmeister General

I agree with your conclusion but not your reasoning. Religious beliefs are founded on premises that must be true (e.g., the holy book of the religion is perfectly correct). Therefore, any evidence that appears to contradict an axiom of the religion is either dismissed or discounted. (For example, I recall many decades ago that skeptics questioned the gospels because there was no evidence that Pontius Pilate had ever existed; this "fact" was ignored or discounted. Interestingly, in 1964 an archaelogical discovery in Israel confirmed Pilate's existence and his position as Governor at the time of Jesus, thereby proving the skeptics wrong in this instance.)

Given that this has happened on several occasions, is it any wonder that Christians tend to be skeptical of "evidence" that supposedly contradicts the Bible?

[Inconceivable]

Obligatory Raptor Jesus joke here.

[Noddy]

Originally Posted by gosuruss

ive come to the conclusion that religion threads are a waste of time. you can't convince people to change their beliefs when their logic does not follow any chain of reasoning. that coupled with the fact that not many people are willing to admit they are wrong makes it not a good use of time.

nooooooooooooooooo!

Don't forget about the lurkers, the fence sitters, the non thinkers and the undecideds...

post for them

Also, you have, on several occasions, alleviated an urge for me to gouge my eyes out with my mouse.

post counter-apologetics for your fellow non-god-bots. In addition to the above you up our game

please!

[snikelfritz]

Originally Posted by SamTheEagle

Given that this has happened on several occasions, is it any wonder that Christians tend to be skeptical of "evidence" that supposedly contradicts the Bible?

From an athiest perspective, there's just so little in the bible that can be taken literally, I mean, ok so there was a Pontius Pilot, how does that support a flood covering all the surfaces of the earth? Or a man living inside a whale? Or any other of the things in the bible that contradict all other sources of knowledge.

ETA, and we also have that thread just for trolling now, so this thread should probably really just be a subset of that one.

[Jasper07734]

Originally Posted by gosuruss

ive come to the conclusion that Buck threads are a waste of time. you can't convince people to change their beliefs when their logic does not follow any chain of reasoning. that coupled with the fact that not many people are willing to admit they are wrong makes it not a good use of time.

Originally Posted by r. mutt

I changed a word in your post.

I did too.

[Buck]

One problem -- religion is not a knowledge source -- religion does not research, study anything. Then, how does religion explain?

Bible was written by humans (written by religious people with coercing and controlling others in mind); it's nothing but a bad fiction book.