Total Posts:34|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Evidence

Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 12:40:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Do you use contemporary technology that required contemporary science and technological advancements to create? Do you rely on medical science for the health and livelihood of you and your family? Then, my question is simple.

Dear Theist:

How come you live your daily life depending on the same science that you deny once you encounter an aspect of it you don't understand, without taking the time to look it up and learn about it to determine whether it actually makes sense?
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 12:58:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 12:59:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

I believe this thread was a reaction to http://debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:01:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

True, and I am quite happy to say that modern science really got going as a method of knowing God: what a good way to demonstrate a law giver, if you discover laws in nature.

However, religion has also been responsible for a significant amount of stifling science and knowledge.

Ever wondered why modern Baghdad is no longer the centre for science and mathematics it was many hundreds of years ago?
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:02:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

God, I hope you realize that I'm not an atheist.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:03:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:02:49 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

God, I hope you realize that I'm not an atheist.

That's really cool. My response to the OP didn't assume anything about your religious affiliation.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:05:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:01:06 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

True, and I am quite happy to say that modern science really got going as a method of knowing God: what a good way to demonstrate a law giver, if you discover laws in nature.

However, religion has also been responsible for a significant amount of stifling science and knowledge.

Ever wondered why modern Baghdad is no longer the centre for science and mathematics it was many hundreds of years ago?

I don't deny that religions have slowed scientific progress in certain areas.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:06:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:03:59 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:02:49 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

God, I hope you realize that I'm not an atheist.

That's really cool. My response to the OP didn't assume anything about your religious affiliation.

Yes it did.

Because, clearly, I would have realized that not all theists are Young Earth Creationists, for example, if I'm a theist, yet not a Young Earth Creationist.

Lol.
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:07:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:05:36 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:01:06 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

True, and I am quite happy to say that modern science really got going as a method of knowing God: what a good way to demonstrate a law giver, if you discover laws in nature.

However, religion has also been responsible for a significant amount of stifling science and knowledge.

Ever wondered why modern Baghdad is no longer the centre for science and mathematics it was many hundreds of years ago?

I don't deny that religions have slowed scientific progress in certain areas.

YECs are me of those religions attempting to do the same.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:08:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:01:06 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

True, and I am quite happy to say that modern science really got going as a method of knowing God: what a good way to demonstrate a law giver, if you discover laws in nature.

However, religion has also been responsible for a significant amount of stifling science and knowledge.

Ever wondered why modern Baghdad is no longer the centre for science and mathematics it was many hundreds of years ago?

Indeed!!!!!

So, perhaps it's wise to demarcate what specifically religion is meant to explore, rather than attempting to extrapolate it into all aspects of life, even to which it doesn't apply.

In other words, religion is an exploration of spirituality and morality, not human understanding of physical characteristics of the universe.

Under that understanding, they needn't contradict, nor hinder one another.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:10:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:06:02 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:03:59 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:02:49 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

God, I hope you realize that I'm not an atheist.

That's really cool. My response to the OP didn't assume anything about your religious affiliation.

Yes it did.

Because, clearly, I would have realized that not all theists are Young Earth Creationists, for example, if I'm a theist, yet not a Young Earth Creationist.

Lol.

That doesn't assume you're an atheist, however, because I never made a statement or implication concerning your religion. The very fact that you claim you would have knowledge given a certain religious affiliation (non-Creationist theist) shows this -- you could just have easily been a deist, agnostic, atheist, or whatever. Nowhere did I claim anything about your religion.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:11:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:07:26 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:05:36 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:01:06 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

True, and I am quite happy to say that modern science really got going as a method of knowing God: what a good way to demonstrate a law giver, if you discover laws in nature.

However, religion has also been responsible for a significant amount of stifling science and knowledge.

Ever wondered why modern Baghdad is no longer the centre for science and mathematics it was many hundreds of years ago?

I don't deny that religions have slowed scientific progress in certain areas.

YECs are me of those religions attempting to do the same.

I'm against Creationism for that very reason.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:12:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:10:31 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:06:02 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:03:59 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:02:49 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

God, I hope you realize that I'm not an atheist.

That's really cool. My response to the OP didn't assume anything about your religious affiliation.

Yes it did.

Because, clearly, I would have realized that not all theists are Young Earth Creationists, for example, if I'm a theist, yet not a Young Earth Creationist.

Lol.

That doesn't assume you're an atheist, however, because I never made a statement or implication concerning your religion. The very fact that you claim you would have knowledge given a certain religious affiliation (non-Creationist theist) shows this -- you could just have easily been a deist, agnostic, atheist, or whatever. Nowhere did I claim anything about your religion.

A deist is a theist. An agnostic is a potential deist.

You made a flawed assumption.

People make mistakes. It's okay.
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:13:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:08:27 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:01:06 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

True, and I am quite happy to say that modern science really got going as a method of knowing God: what a good way to demonstrate a law giver, if you discover laws in nature.

However, religion has also been responsible for a significant amount of stifling science and knowledge.

Ever wondered why modern Baghdad is no longer the centre for science and mathematics it was many hundreds of years ago?

Indeed!!!!!

So, perhaps it's wise to demarcate what specifically religion is meant to explore, rather than attempting to extrapolate it into all aspects of life, even to which it doesn't apply.

In other words, religion is an exploration of spirituality and morality, not human understanding of physical characteristics of the universe.

Under that understanding, they needn't contradict, nor hinder one another.

I would agree, to a large extent in principle. The science vs religion debate as framed by many creationists is actually reason vs not reason.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:17:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:12:41 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:10:31 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:06:02 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:03:59 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:02:49 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

God, I hope you realize that I'm not an atheist.

That's really cool. My response to the OP didn't assume anything about your religious affiliation.

Yes it did.

Because, clearly, I would have realized that not all theists are Young Earth Creationists, for example, if I'm a theist, yet not a Young Earth Creationist.

Lol.

That doesn't assume you're an atheist, however, because I never made a statement or implication concerning your religion. The very fact that you claim you would have knowledge given a certain religious affiliation (non-Creationist theist) shows this -- you could just have easily been a deist, agnostic, atheist, or whatever. Nowhere did I claim anything about your religion.

A deist is a theist. An agnostic is a potential deist.

You made a flawed assumption.

People make mistakes. It's okay.

Once again, I did not assume anything about your religion. I did not care, and still do not care, what your religious affiliation is, or how you characterize yourself religiously. Your religion means absolutely nothing to me, and my response didn't assume anything about it. My response to the OP concerned a few things you may or may not have known while writing what seemed to be a generalized letter to theists everywhere.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:22:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:17:46 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:12:41 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:10:31 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:06:02 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:03:59 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:02:49 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

God, I hope you realize that I'm not an atheist.

That's really cool. My response to the OP didn't assume anything about your religious affiliation.

Yes it did.

Because, clearly, I would have realized that not all theists are Young Earth Creationists, for example, if I'm a theist, yet not a Young Earth Creationist.

Lol.

That doesn't assume you're an atheist, however, because I never made a statement or implication concerning your religion. The very fact that you claim you would have knowledge given a certain religious affiliation (non-Creationist theist) shows this -- you could just have easily been a deist, agnostic, atheist, or whatever. Nowhere did I claim anything about your religion.

A deist is a theist. An agnostic is a potential deist.

You made a flawed assumption.

People make mistakes. It's okay.

Once again, I did not assume anything about your religion. I did not care, and still do not care, what your religious affiliation is, or how you characterize yourself religiously. Your religion means absolutely nothing to me, and my response didn't assume anything about it. My response to the OP concerned a few things you may or may not have known while writing what seemed to be a generalized letter to theists everywhere.

^^^^ Once again.

I'll type this slowly for you.

That...

...could not...

...have been...

...a...

...generalize letter...

...to theists everywhere...

...if...

...the OP...

...were...

...a...

...theist.

Accordingly,

...there required...

...some assumption...

...about...

...the OP's...

...religious affiliation...

...for you to...

...have had...

...that response.
Dirty.Harry
Posts: 1,578
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:27:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:01:06 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

True, and I am quite happy to say that modern science really got going as a method of knowing God: what a good way to demonstrate a law giver, if you discover laws in nature.

However, religion has also been responsible for a significant amount of stifling science and knowledge.

Ever wondered why modern Baghdad is no longer the centre for science and mathematics it was many hundreds of years ago?

The renaisaince was a period saturared in Christianity and Catholicism yet despite that many of the greatest technological advances emerged.

Newton, Galileo, Jamex Clark Maxwell, Copernicus, Kepler, Descartes, Pascal, Boyle, Planck and many more leading thinkers all believed in a God.

How can such a belief be bad for us if those who have advanced science the most all held that belief and made their discoveries and advances in socities where God was by and large taken for granted?

Harry.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:29:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:22:54 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:17:46 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:12:41 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:10:31 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:06:02 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:03:59 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:02:49 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

God, I hope you realize that I'm not an atheist.

That's really cool. My response to the OP didn't assume anything about your religious affiliation.

Yes it did.

Because, clearly, I would have realized that not all theists are Young Earth Creationists, for example, if I'm a theist, yet not a Young Earth Creationist.

Lol.

That doesn't assume you're an atheist, however, because I never made a statement or implication concerning your religion. The very fact that you claim you would have knowledge given a certain religious affiliation (non-Creationist theist) shows this -- you could just have easily been a deist, agnostic, atheist, or whatever. Nowhere did I claim anything about your religion.

A deist is a theist. An agnostic is a potential deist.

You made a flawed assumption.

People make mistakes. It's okay.

Once again, I did not assume anything about your religion. I did not care, and still do not care, what your religious affiliation is, or how you characterize yourself religiously. Your religion means absolutely nothing to me, and my response didn't assume anything about it. My response to the OP concerned a few things you may or may not have known while writing what seemed to be a generalized letter to theists everywhere.

^^^^ Once again.

I'll type this slowly for you.

That...

...could not...

...have been...

...a...

...generalize letter...

...to theists everywhere...

...if...

...the OP...

...were...

...a...

...theist.

Accordingly,

...there required...

...some assumption...

...about...

...the OP's...

...religious affiliation...

...for you to...

...have had...

...that response.

"Dear Theist" surely sounds like a generalized letter to theists everywhere -- because it is. However, you don't need to be an atheist to write a generalized letter to theists -- I could write a letter to Catholics, even as a Catholic myself. It doesn't matter what your religion is. You could have been an agnostic. You could have been a pantheist. I don't care what you were, I was not assuming you were an atheist while writing it. And I knew I wasn't assuming it.

Moreover, my points laid out in the response to the OP still stand.

Also, please stop with the patronizing nonsense, and just try to have a discussion.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:30:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:29:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

"Dear Theist" surely sounds like a generalized letter to theists everywhere -- because it is.

Given this has already been posted:

At 2/3/2013 12:59:54 PM, Enji wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

I believe this thread was a reaction to http://debate.org...

And that thread is directly below this one, and I posted a link to this thread in that thread, you have absolutely no excuse for this. Accordingly,

Also, please stop with the patronizing nonsense, and just try to have a discussion.

If you're going to act dense, I'll treat you like you're dense.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:34:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:30:44 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:29:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

"Dear Theist" surely sounds like a generalized letter to theists everywhere -- because it is.

Given this has already been posted:

At 2/3/2013 12:59:54 PM, Enji wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

I believe this thread was a reaction to http://debate.org...

And that thread is directly below this one, and I posted a link to this thread in that thread, you have absolutely no excuse for this. Accordingly,

I'm sorry, no. "Dear Theists" is still the opening to what would be a generalized letter to theists. I don't care if it was a response to another thread in the Religion forum. I was addressing the OP. I have no part in the discussion on that thread. Should I have assumed it was a response to another thread that I wasn't keeping up with? If you wanted this to be an extension of that thread, why not just post in that thread instead? It would have made a lot more sense than acting as if I should have known who or what you were responding to in some other thread I have no part in.

Also, please stop with the patronizing nonsense, and just try to have a discussion.

If you're going to act dense, I'll treat you like you're dense.

I'm not acting dense. Your attitude is just pathetic.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:37:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:34:39 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:30:44 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:29:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

"Dear Theist" surely sounds like a generalized letter to theists everywhere -- because it is.

Given this has already been posted:

At 2/3/2013 12:59:54 PM, Enji wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

I believe this thread was a reaction to http://debate.org...

And that thread is directly below this one, and I posted a link to this thread in that thread, you have absolutely no excuse for this. Accordingly,

I'm sorry, no. "Dear Theists" is still the opening to what would be a generalized letter to theists. I don't care if it was a response to another thread in the Religion forum. I was addressing the OP. I have no part in the discussion on that thread. Should I have assumed it was a response to another thread that I wasn't keeping up with? If you wanted this to be an extension of that thread, why not just post in that thread instead? It would have made a lot more sense than acting as if I should have known who or what you were responding to in some other thread I have no part in.

Also, please stop with the patronizing nonsense, and just try to have a discussion.

If you're going to act dense, I'll treat you like you're dense.

I'm not acting dense. Your attitude is just pathetic.

Also, I was aware of the context of this thread after Enji posted the thread the OP was replying to. Afterwards, we were just arguing over what I assumed or did not assume.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:49:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:34:39 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:30:44 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:29:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

"Dear Theist" surely sounds like a generalized letter to theists everywhere -- because it is.

Given this has already been posted:

At 2/3/2013 12:59:54 PM, Enji wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

I believe this thread was a reaction to http://debate.org...

And that thread is directly below this one, and I posted a link to this thread in that thread, you have absolutely no excuse for this. Accordingly,

I'm sorry, no. "Dear Theists" is still the opening to what would be a generalized letter to theists. I don't care if it was a response to another thread in the Religion forum. I was addressing the OP. I have no part in the discussion on that thread. Should I have assumed it was a response to another thread that I wasn't keeping up with? If you wanted this to be an extension of that thread, why not just post in that thread instead? It would have made a lot more sense than acting as if I should have known who or what you were responding to in some other thread I have no part in.

Unless, of course, you received that response explaining the thread before you received mine (which you did).

Lol.

Also, please stop with the patronizing nonsense, and just try to have a discussion.

If you're going to act dense, I'll treat you like you're dense.

I'm not acting dense. Your attitude is just pathetic.

Awwww, poor thing.

Here's a hanky.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:50:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:37:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

Also, I was aware of the context of this thread after Enji posted the thread the OP was replying to. Afterwards, we were just arguing over what I assumed or did not assume.

Okay, babykins, you're right. You're always right, and you're just the smartest little man I've ever come across! ^_^

Happy?
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:52:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Anyway, some excellent points have been made in this thread before someone tried a little too hard to make it all about him.

I'll summarize:

- Religion and science does not necessarily contradict
- Both religion and science has resulted in human advancement
- Some of the most brilliant scientists have been religious
- Even most theists disbelieve Young Earth Creationism
- Religiosity does not require dogmatism

Let's continue, shall we? ^_^
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:54:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:49:50 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:34:39 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:30:44 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:29:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

"Dear Theist" surely sounds like a generalized letter to theists everywhere -- because it is.

Given this has already been posted:

At 2/3/2013 12:59:54 PM, Enji wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

I believe this thread was a reaction to http://debate.org...

And that thread is directly below this one, and I posted a link to this thread in that thread, you have absolutely no excuse for this. Accordingly,

I'm sorry, no. "Dear Theists" is still the opening to what would be a generalized letter to theists. I don't care if it was a response to another thread in the Religion forum. I was addressing the OP. I have no part in the discussion on that thread. Should I have assumed it was a response to another thread that I wasn't keeping up with? If you wanted this to be an extension of that thread, why not just post in that thread instead? It would have made a lot more sense than acting as if I should have known who or what you were responding to in some other thread I have no part in.

Unless, of course, you received that response explaining the thread before you received mine (which you did).

Lol.

Like I said, I put this thread into context when Enji posted that. Afterwards, we were arguing over what I assumed in my response to the OP... to which I still think I'm right.

Also, please stop with the patronizing nonsense, and just try to have a discussion.

If you're going to act dense, I'll treat you like you're dense.

I'm not acting dense. Your attitude is just pathetic.

Awwww, poor thing.

Here's a hanky.

Though I love the idea of DDO, and usually enjoy it, it's comments like these that bring me back to the sad reality of the Internet.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:56:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:50:47 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:37:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

Also, I was aware of the context of this thread after Enji posted the thread the OP was replying to. Afterwards, we were just arguing over what I assumed or did not assume.

Okay, babykins, you're right. You're always right, and you're just the smartest little man I've ever come across! ^_^

Happy?

I'll just ignore comments like these, I guess.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:56:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:54:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:49:50 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:34:39 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:30:44 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:29:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

"Dear Theist" surely sounds like a generalized letter to theists everywhere -- because it is.

Given this has already been posted:

At 2/3/2013 12:59:54 PM, Enji wrote:
At 2/3/2013 12:57:35 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
God, I hope you realize the Young Earth Creationist is a very specific demographic within Christianity, and I surely hope you know that theists have been responsible for plenty of modern scientific advancements.

I believe this thread was a reaction to http://debate.org...

And that thread is directly below this one, and I posted a link to this thread in that thread, you have absolutely no excuse for this. Accordingly,

I'm sorry, no. "Dear Theists" is still the opening to what would be a generalized letter to theists. I don't care if it was a response to another thread in the Religion forum. I was addressing the OP. I have no part in the discussion on that thread. Should I have assumed it was a response to another thread that I wasn't keeping up with? If you wanted this to be an extension of that thread, why not just post in that thread instead? It would have made a lot more sense than acting as if I should have known who or what you were responding to in some other thread I have no part in.

Unless, of course, you received that response explaining the thread before you received mine (which you did).

Lol.

Like I said, I put this thread into context when Enji posted that. Afterwards, we were arguing over what I assumed in my response to the OP... to which I still think I'm right.

Also, please stop with the patronizing nonsense, and just try to have a discussion.

If you're going to act dense, I'll treat you like you're dense.

I'm not acting dense. Your attitude is just pathetic.

Awwww, poor thing.

Here's a hanky.

Though I love the idea of DDO, and usually enjoy it, it's comments like these that bring me back to the sad reality of the Internet.

If you click the gear symbol at the upper right next to your name, there will be a list. At the bottom of that list, you'll see the words "Go fvck yourself." Go ahead and click on that, and you may find what you seek.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:57:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:56:04 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:50:47 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/3/2013 1:37:02 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:

Also, I was aware of the context of this thread after Enji posted the thread the OP was replying to. Afterwards, we were just arguing over what I assumed or did not assume.

Okay, babykins, you're right. You're always right, and you're just the smartest little man I've ever come across! ^_^

Happy?

I'll just ignore comments like these, I guess.

You're such a big little man! All grown up! I'm so proud of you!!
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/3/2013 1:58:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/3/2013 1:52:17 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
Anyway, some excellent points have been made in this thread before someone tried a little too hard to make it all about him.

I'll summarize:

- Religion and science does not necessarily contradict
- Both religion and science has resulted in human advancement
- Some of the most brilliant scientists have been religious
- Even most theists disbelieve Young Earth Creationism
- Religiosity does not require dogmatism

Let's continue, shall we? ^_^