Peanut Butter = Evolution is a lie

[mar1t1me]

^^ Misunderstood statement of concept.

But yes, he even made the devil, knowing he would be (a fucking scourge on the face of the earth, squashing the weak, and empowering the evil) his tool to test the faith of those who are his chosen ones. Trust in him would not be possible, or worth anything if it were an easy thing to do/have/be.

But the whole dog and pony show is childishly ridiculous! Why the silly need for mystery? Why the faith? If God is omnipotent, why can't he/she/it reveal itself to the world in an instant. Do not tell me "oh he will someday". That same line of crap has been feed to generations. War, hunger, disease, abuse....it could all end tomorrow....or is God a sadist?

To me, the existence of the devil is just a convenient (too convenient) way to explain all the naturally occurring bad things that happen. It becomes easy to say either A: It was God's will you got a tumor, or B: the devil gave you the tumor. Either way, if Mr. Omnipotent wants you to have a fuckin' tumor, then that's what you're getting.

And if you are miraculously healed, then A: God wanted you healed, or B: the devil lost a battle of spiritual warfare because God used your illness to beat him.

So either way, it's easy to explain. Only one thing. Apparently, no matter how worthy you may be, or how intensely you are prayed for, even if the whole world joins in, God just can't pull off healing an amputee. His omnipotence ends at severed body parts. Not to worry-you will certainly receive your perfect body when you go to Heaven. So wait it out on Earth with the rest of us. Only, uhh, don't think about rushing things by killing yourself just to get to Heaven faster! It won't work-you'll go straight to Hell-no pass go, no collecting 72 Virgins. Oh wait.....wrong invisible man in the sky..... crap......

;)

[u3b3rg33k]

My bible is red, and has a picture of an e30 on the cover.

I think it might have some Jiffy smudges on it...

[Farbin Kaiber]

^^ Misunderstood statement of concept.

But yes, he even made the devil, knowing he would be (a fucking scourge on the face of the earth, squashing the weak, and empowering the evil) his tool to test the faith of those who are his chosen ones. Trust in him would not be possible, or worth anything if it were an easy thing to do/have/be.

If your Mom said she was gonna test your ability to follow rules by giving you a rule "Do not take any cookies from the cookie jar" and then placing you in a kitchen with nary a cookiejar in sight. It wouldn't be a test, nor hard for you to follow the request, would it? But, if instead, there was a huge cookie jar in that kitchen, illuminated with neon flashing lights and circus music, and you didn't take any, your Mom would be quite proud of you.

[sonnyqm3]

I see the point you are trying to make, but I still think you are off the mark.

Because although I have not done it, the "laws" of science can be proven. However, no one can "prove" the existence of god. I thnk that is an important distinction.

god does exist..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz1gbBJ59JY

[LBJefferies]

I thought that was the old testament god?

So they say but last I checked, there is still hatred and evil in this world. It had to come from somewhere and since everything was created by God, it must have come from him.

[z31maniac]

Thank you ;)

Some laws.

I don't recall if you have a child, and this is totally subjective (and sappy), but every time I look at my daughter there is no doubt in my mind that an intelligent creator (not me) is responsible for her existence :D

The ones that can't be proven are "theories" and not "laws."

Hence, the theory of relatively, but the law of gravity.

No kids here, but I can appreciate your sentiment on that subject.

[z31maniac]

I thought that was the old testament god?

[Farbin Kaiber]

Pretty simple, really.....

.....you see, there's genetic code in both sperm and egg, and the combination of the two, if all goes well, produces healthy, fully formed offspring. Coupled with responsible, loving parents who emphasize desirable behavioral traits while avoiding reinforcing undesirable behavioral traits, the combination yields children of above average intelligence and good temperament.

Dude......take some credit! An "intelligent creator" didn't raise her. You did. In the hands of lousy parents, she would not be the same child. If you were to suddenly die, the "intelligent creator" will not lift a finger to make life better for her. If the "intelligent creator" existed, we wouldn't need to buy insurance!

When I see my children and how they conduct themselves in public-their thoughtfulness and awareness, I know where it came from. It came from the high expectations of parents who don't sell their kids short and instead help them learn to think for themselves and behave in ways that are likely to help them make something of themselves.

Lots of lousy religious parents out there who teach their kids things that will damn them to a lifetime of ignorance and fear.

There is your fatal assumption. I bet you think Christians think God is a loving, caring, being.

God may have these characteristics, but it is not inherent that he be ONLY these things, keep in mind, he is an angry, vengeful, killer.

The correct, and little understood title of the "Father" is to give you that understanding that he is gonna do everything in his ability to take care and teach you, but if you go against him, he has no issue with moving your name to the book of the dead. (Or grounding you spiritually) See how it does not mean he has to be a nice guy, taking care of you and removing the need for life insurance? Just cuz he can, does not mean he will.

[fiftytakedowns]

Im likely to believe a 15 min expirement wiht peanut butter can hypothesize multiple billions of years of genetic changes, evolutions, faults, successes, and ultimately species.

/thread

[Massive Lee]

... but every time I look at my daughter there is no doubt in my mind that an intelligent creator (not me) is responsible for her existence :D

Are you blaming it on the milkman?

[mar1t1me]

Some laws.

I don't recall if you have a child, and this is totally subjective (and sappy), but every time I look at my daughter there is no doubt in my mind that an intelligent creator (not me) is responsible for her existence :D

Pretty simple, really.....

.....you see, there's genetic code in both sperm and egg, and the combination of the two, if all goes well, produces healthy, fully formed offspring. Coupled with responsible, loving parents who emphasize desirable behavioral traits while avoiding reinforcing undesirable behavioral traits, the combination yields children of above average intelligence and good temperament.

Dude......take some credit! An "intelligent creator" didn't raise her. You did. In the hands of lousy parents, she would not be the same child. If you were to suddenly die, the "intelligent creator" will not lift a finger to make life better for her. If the "intelligent creator" existed, we wouldn't need to buy insurance!

When I see my children and how they conduct themselves in public-their thoughtfulness and awareness, I know where it came from. It came from the high expectations of parents who don't sell their kids short and instead help them learn to think for themselves and behave in ways that are likely to help them make something of themselves.

Lots of lousy religious parents out there who teach their kids things that will damn them to a lifetime of ignorance and fear.

[markseven]

I see the point you are trying to make, but I still think you are off the mark.

Because although I have not done it, the "laws" of science can be proven. However, no one can "prove" the existence of god. I thnk that is an important distinction.

Thank you ;)

Some laws.

I don't recall if you have a child, and this is totally subjective (and sappy), but every time I look at my daughter there is no doubt in my mind that an intelligent creator (not me) is responsible for her existence :D

[z31maniac]

Nope, not misrepresenting science. Unless you have performed the experiment yourself, unless you have done the research yourself, you are relying on someone else's findings. You beliefs are based, you are exhibiting faith in someone else's work. You are taking their word for it.

I see the point you are trying to make, but I still think you are off the mark.

Because although I have not done it, the "laws" of science can be proven. However, no one can "prove" the existence of god. I thnk that is an important distinction.

[sonnyqm3]

we humans were given a brain/knowledge, so its up to us to find the right path.

[markseven]

Yeah you're right, why think for yourself when there's a book that conveniently does it all for you!

The Bible is a part of it, not all of it.