Ask Me Help Desk
Page 1 of 6 1 > Last»
Show %1$s post(s) from this question on one page

Ask Me Help Desk (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forum.php)
-   Religious Discussions (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=485)
-   -   "Evolution" or "Origin of the Universe" and religion (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=236939)

  • Jul 13, 2008, 10:13 AM
    Credendovidis
    "Evolution" or "Origin of the Universe" and religion
    N0help4u asked me elsewhere to explain as to how I believe this earth came into being.

    Well : as belief has religious connotations, I do not BELIEVE that the earth came into being by any deity doing a once-only job in only 6 days. Mainly because I do not see any need for deities to exist, nor objective supported evidence for the existence of such deities.

    Evolution is just a physical process involving evolution, biology, and lot's of time.
    The origin of the universe is a cosmological process involving also lot's of time.
    If people like Nohelp4u want to know more about evolution , why don't they ask for that?
    And if people like Nohelp4u want to know more about the origin of the universe, why don't they ask for that?
    Why always ask indirect questions, and combine that with a religious connotation like the "belief" argument ?

    :)

    ·
  • Jul 13, 2008, 10:19 AM
    N0help4u
    I have asked you several times through the years WHAT DO YOU believe.
    How do YOU think the earth came into being?
    What is your thoughts on evolution?
    What and how do you think we started as and progressed to?

    Think/believe either or is YOUR belief on the way you think it happened
    Doesn't look like you gave much of an answer here either.

    So are you going to answer since I just asked?
  • Jul 13, 2008, 05:34 PM
    Credendovidis
    1 Attachment(s)
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    I have asked you several times through the years WHAT DO YOU believe.
    Linda : and I have answered that already many times : I do not believe anything in regards to religious matters. Note that I do not mind that people believe. I only dislike people trying to convince me of their belief - specially once I have clearly informed them not to be interested. So please rephrase your questions in the future : I do NOT BELIEVE in anything religious.

    The origin on the universe is not something you believe in, except for those who believe in religious creation.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    How do YOU think the earth came into being?
    It is not what I THINK. Science has a perfect and objective supported explanation on how almost every solar system is born. And I accept that explanation as most probable.
    A near by star passing through the galactic disk disturbed and/or a super nova influenced a gas cloud , which resulted in collapse of that cloud into several centers, each center becoming a solar system. Our telescopes clearly show that process happening all around our galaxy and everywhere in the universe.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    What is your thoughts on evolution?
    It is not what I THINK. Science clearly proved that over time all life forms we see today on earth evolved from only two cells. One "Eve" cell provided the basis of all DNA in each living cell, except for the DNA in each mitochondrion (the powerhouse of each cell), as that DNA seems to have resulted from an early capture and absorption of another living cell into the "Eve" cell. (See below the graphic on cell lay-out)

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    What and how do you think we started out as and progressed to?
    Please clearly and precisely explain what you are asking here. This is extremely unclear.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    Think/believe either or is YOUR belief on the way you think it happened
    Doesn't look like you gave much of an answer here either.
    Please clearly and precisely explain what you are asking here. This also is extremely unclear.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    So are you going to answer since I just asked?
    I never refused to answer any of your questions. But as long as you keep harping about belief or the euphemism you use now (think / thoughts), all I can say is that I do not believe - at least not in religious based explanations.
    The problem is yours, with your unclarity of questioning, and with trying to add belief into items like standard scientific subjects that do not require any religious belief connotations, like evolution and origin of the universe.

    Like my topic question clearly stated : if you want to know my thoughts on a topic, just ask me. But do not try to add a religious meaning on to that !

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Jul 13, 2008, 05:45 PM
    N0help4u
    Think/believe either or is YOUR belief on the way you think it happened
    XxxDoesn't look like you gave much of an answer here either ---xxx meant to delete sorry.
    ***Please clearly and precisely explain what you are asking here. This also is extremely unclear.

    I NEVER said believe IN
    I say what do you believe
    AS IN
    Dictionary:
    Believe
    (bĭ-lēv') pronunciation

    v. -lieved, -liev·ing, -lieves.

    1. To accept as true or real: Do you believe the news stories?
    2. To credit with veracity: I believe you.
    3. To expect or suppose; think: I believe they will arrive shortly.

    BY what do you THINK I mean what scientific things do you adhere to as what you think is the beginning of life and the universe
    ---------

    What and how do you think we started as and progressed to?
    ***Please clearly and precisely explain what you are asking here. This is extremely unclear.

    You answered it with the two cells and Eve
    --------
    ***Like my topic question clearly stated : if you want to know my thoughts on a topic, just ask me. But do not try to add a religious meaning on to that !


    Whether you believe it or not I am capable of discussing issues separately (science/religion)


    :D
  • Jul 13, 2008, 06:59 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    Doesn't look like you gave much of an answer here either.
    If you do not ask questions properly, you will not get a proper reply either.
    I do not care about any definitions you get from whatever obscure dictionary on belief/believe.
    I answered to every line of your previous post, and still you complain...

    Why not start commenting on what I already replied to you..?

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Jul 13, 2008, 07:07 PM
    N0help4u
    Doesn't look like you gave much of an answer here either.------meant to delete that line after I cut and pasted sorry :o

    Not much to comment on yet

    Two more ?'s
    What *scientific explanation put the planets together

    Between the two cells to human form what are the steps in between

    [science never was my better subject]
  • Jul 13, 2008, 07:14 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    Doesn't look like you gave much of an answer here either.
    You can keep asking whatever you want. But when are you going to discuss my replies to what you asked before in this topic?
    If you do not do that, I will not waste my time on answering new questions posted by you.

    Do you know the adage : "A fool can ask more questions than a wise man can answer" ?
    I will not say from myself that I am wise, but you surely ask a lot of (unclear) questions...

    :D :rolleyes: :p ;) :D

    ·
  • Jul 13, 2008, 07:22 PM
    inthebox
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    It is not what I THINK. Science clearly proved that over time all life forms we see today on earth evolved from only two cells. One "Eve" cell provided the basis of all DNA in each living cell, except for the DNA in each mitochondrion (the powerhouse of each cell), as that DNA seems to have resulted from an early capture and absorption of another living cell into the "Eve" cell. (See below the graphic on cell lay-out)

    ·
    "prove it" show us the link ;)

    I like they way they co-opt "eve" an obvious religious reference. :D
  • Jul 13, 2008, 07:29 PM
    N0help4u
    My comments:

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    Linda : and I have answered that already many times : I do not believe anything in regards to religious matters. Note that I do not mind that people believe. I only dislike people trying to convince me of their belief - specially once I have clearly informed them not to be interested. So please rephrase your questions in the future : I do NOT BELIEVE in anything religious.
    I know what you have to say about believe and religion! You have made that clear more than many times. I get it even if others do not.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    The origin on the universe is not something you believe in, except for those who believe in religious creation.

    It is not what I THINK. Science has a perfect and objective supported explanation on how almost each and every solar system is born. And I accept that explanation as most probable.
    A near by star passing through the galactic disk disturbed and/or a super nova influenced a gas cloud , which resulted in collapse of that cloud into several centers, each center becoming a solar system. Our telescopes clearly show that process happening all around our galaxy and everywhere in the universe.

    It is not what I THINK.

    I explained that in post #3
    BUT I have heard variations of how people interpret scientific evidence/fact
    Such as the big bang which you do not believe whereas others say it is science.
    SO THAT is why I ask you what you think

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    Science clearly proved that over time all life forms we see today on earth evolved from only two cells. One "Eve" cell provided the basis of all DNA in each living cell, except for the DNA in each mitochondrion (the powerhouse of each cell), as that DNA seems to have resulted from an early capture and absorption of another living cell into the "Eve" cell. (See below the graphic on cell lay-out)
    Okay that is a start to answering my questions but I still want to know the answers to my other two questions to get a better picture. Not much I can comment on on two cells.


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    I never refused to answer any of your questions. But as long as you keep harping about belief or the euphemism you use now (think / thoughts), all I can say is that I do not believe - at least not in religious based explanations.
    The problem is yours, with your unclarity of questioning, and with trying to add belief into items like standard scientific subjects that do not require any religious belief connotations, like evolution and origin of the universe.
    The sooner you understand that when I say believe it is the definition in #3 but you are so hung up on connecting religion and believe that you can't seem to see past that.


    :rolleyes:


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    Please clearly and precisely explain what you are asking here. This is extremely unclear.
    What *scientific explanation put the planets together

    Between the two cells to human form what are the steps in between

    [science never was my better subject]
  • Jul 13, 2008, 07:41 PM
    inthebox
    Once again, scientists changing their minds and theories as new evidence comes about.


    Comments by People in the News - Google News

    Quote:
    The distance the eye migrates is directly related to the rate and degree of skull remodeling and bone ossification that occurs during metamorphosis, and these will vary with ecological conditions and, ultimately, with the responsiveness of metamorphic genes to thyroid hormone...

    In effect, flatfish morphological asymmetry can be entirely dissociated from flatfish behavioral asymmetry!

    So this scientist states eye changes occur in one lifetime, due to response to thyroid hormone, yet also postulates that it is behavior caused gene selection?

    Which came first the gene or the behavior?


    Fish Fossil May Resolve Questions On Natural Selection - Science - redOrbit


    Quote:

    "This problem of the evolution of asymmetrical flatfishes was particularly puzzling to biologists because it was very hard to explain what evolutionary forces might have led to this transition," said Matt Friedman, the study’s author and a graduate student at the University of Chicago.

    "How can you arrive at the pattern seen in living flatfishes via gradual evolution? There seems to be no adaptive reason to start down the gradual evolutionary path toward the flatfish condition, because surely these intermediates would not have any kind of evolutionary advantage," said Friedman, who also serves as a research associate at The Field Museum.

    Some view this missing link as a flaw in the theory of natural selection. They argue that intermediate, transitional forms of the fish could not exist because there would be no survival benefit from having one eye that was slightly off center on the opposite side of the head.

    Biologists subscribe to the “hopeful monster” theory, which says these changes occurred all at once through a large-scale mutation, which fortunately turned out to be very useful.

    But Friedman's find indicates that flatfishes followed a more conventional evolutionary plan.

    There is a broad implication for the tempo and mode of evolution here," Friedman said.

    "Scientists had long assumed flatfishes must have arisen suddenly because they could not imagine the adaptive significance of intermediates, but this work delivers clear evidence that such intermediates did exist, and therefore, that flatfish asymmetry arose gradually."

    Well which is it? Fast or slow, sudden or gradual?



    Maybe 50 million years ago these flatfish had the same genes that allow for morphological changes in one lifetime, as described by the first link.
  • Jul 13, 2008, 07:46 PM
    inthebox
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    Evolution is just a physical process involving evolution, biology, and lot's of time.

    ·
    Your sentence sure explains a lot? :p


    Basketball is just a physical process involving basketball, biology, and lot's of time.

    Or better yet

    Sex is just a physical process involving sex, biology, and [ hopefullly :D ] lot's of time.
  • Jul 13, 2008, 07:49 PM
    N0help4u
    inthebox
    Pretty much why I am asking what he believes that science has to say
  • Jul 13, 2008, 07:52 PM
    inthebox
    YouTube - "Ooh Girl!" - An Honest R&B Song


    After all , life, evolution or not, involves reproduction :D
  • Jul 14, 2008, 03:59 AM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    .... BUT I have heard variations of how people interpret scientific evidence/fact such as the big bang which you do not believe whereas others say it is science.
    "... which you do not believe whereas others say it is science... "

    One does not BELIEVE in science and it's findings. One accepts the scientific findings based on the objective supporting evidence on which these findings are based. So I say exactly the same as these "others".

    The reason why people have to BELIEVE in for instance religion is that there is no objective supporting evidence for any iota of the religious dogmatic claims. That problem does not occur in scientific findings and theories, due to "the scientific method" used in the process.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    okay that is a start to answering my questions but I still want to know the answers to my other two questions to get a better picture. Not much I can comment on on two cells.
    I have replied to your questions. That you do not like my replies is your problem. Not mine. I am open to discuss these answers, but you keep harping on about your personal views being different, and the consequences that you seem to have in the process of replying to my answers.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    The sooner you understand that when I say believe it is the definition in #3 but you are so hung up on connecting religion and believe that you can't seem to see past that.
    The sooner you stop using the word "BELIEF" in regard to scientific theories and support, the earlier we can start debating. You fail to see that it is you yourself who is causing this problem.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    ... science never was my better subject]
    Don't worry on that : even sassyT has that problem, even when she claims to have a degree in biology...

    :D · · :rolleyes: · · :p · · ;) · · :D

    · ·
  • Jul 14, 2008, 04:07 AM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by inthebox
    Once again, scientists changing their minds and theories as new evidence comes about.
    That is the beauty of science : it has a sort of build-in checking program that ensures that the latest findings can be included in the scientific arguments.

    That is indeed different than a period of over 2000 years of dogmatic wild claims that may not be debated, while there is not one single iota of objective supporting evidence for any of the dogmatic claims. Give me therefore science any second of the day above all that religious hot air !

    As to the rest of your post : if you want to discuss the general approach towards science and scientific findings and theories: go ahead. If you want to continue with your anti-scientific approach please go to the Christianity board where there are a lot of creationist peers !

    :D · · :rolleyes: · · :p · · ;) · · :D

    · ·
  • Jul 14, 2008, 05:24 AM
    N0help4u
    I do not understand why you do not understand the difference between believe and believe IN
    Since you persist in making this a believe/religion babble page I find it useless to continue trying to have a discussion to educate my understanding of science here!

    YOU are the one that KEEPS insisting you do not like Christians doing their religious/believe in babble but here I have not brought up religion, God or believe IN
    One single time and you KEEP talking on that when I am trying to get some scientific facts established on what YOU ACCEPT as far as the earth coming into being and people going
    From two cells to human form.

    Since the word accept is the word you prefer over believe I will use that word so I do not further confuse YOUR hang up on the believe word.

    I guess you have a double hang up on the word believe

    1. one of those lost in translation words to your ears
    2. You insist believe is a religious word when it really becomes a religious connotation when it is stated believe IN

    AGAIN to explain:

    I say what do you believe
    AS IN
    Dictionary:
    Believe
    (bĭ-lēv') pronunciation

    v. -lieved, -liev·ing, -lieves.

    1. To accept as true or real: Do you believe the news stories?
    2. To credit with veracity: I believe you.
    3. To expect or suppose; think: I believe they will arrive shortly.


    Not that I expect you to ever understand that.

    I find it futile to furture reply until you answer my two questions. If you replied to them as you claim I sure don't see the replies.

    Why do you assume I do not like your replies. I did not say I do not like your two cell explanation. So therefore I guess the problem is not mine. ***WHERE am I harping anything about my personal beliefs. It seems you are reading a lot into things!!

    I have replied to your questions. That you do not like my replies is your problem. Not mine. I am open to discuss these answers, but you keep harping on about your personal views being different, and the consequences that you seem to have in the process of replying to my answers.


    ****Please post the exact verses on this post that you are referring to as my harping on what I believe.
    Any further babble on religion, belief and claiming I am saying things I have not said and I am not even replying

    I thought YOU posted this so we could discuss science NOT Religion and you keep babbling about your interpretation of believe and religion. I haven't even brought up religion or what I believe once in this post.

    As I have repeatedly stated here again and again is that I use the word believe in the
    I believe the scientist about mars having ice on it. That does NOT mean I believe IN the scientist, mars or ice.
  • Jul 14, 2008, 06:17 AM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    I do not understand why you do not understand the difference between believe and believe IN
    I assume you mean here the noun BELIEF and the verb BELIEVE (in).
    I'm sorry, but I can not help you in understanding this better, other than in stating that the essence of any BELIEF is based on assumptions lacking any objective supported evidence.

    Example : if you THINK or BELIEVE that Obama is the better guy for the job, you do that on subjective assumptions, not on any objective supported evidence. The same goes for all religious claims. Scientific findings are however based on scientific evidence, i.e. by objective supported evidence.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    Since you persist in making this a believe/religion babble page I find it useless to continue trying to have a discussion to educate my understanding of science here!
    This is not a "page" but a topic, in which I referred to "Evolution" or "Origin of the Universe" and religion, as many people seem to have great difficulties in understanding the non-compatibility between religious approach/belief and science and the scientific method.

    If you have questions on Evolution or on the Origin of the Universe, you have to address that from a scientific perspective.
    If you have a question on religious belief you have to address that from a specific religious perspective.
    But you can not address questions on scientific items and processes from a religious perspective, nor can you address questions on religion from a scientific perspective. Not if you intend to let the discussion have any logical sense at all.
    As as far science is concerned all religious thinking lacks any scientific support.

    All these "debates" by theists on Evolution and/or the Origin of the Universe are not about these scientific theories at all, but about the theist BELIEF in an almighty deity with supra-natural powers, a BELIEF that clashes with scientific findings. Hence the empty argumentation and waste of time and energy caused by that.

    :D ;) :p :rolleyes: :D

    ·
  • Jul 14, 2008, 06:27 AM
    N0help4u
    I simply asked you 2 questions

    What *scientific explanation put the planets together

    Between the two cells to human form what are the steps in between

    [science never was my better subject]
    __________________

    You have yet to reply to them, instead you prefer going over sematics of words instead of answering, when I am sure you understand what I mean no matter what words I use since I have explained my perspective of the word(s) repeatedly here.
    We are already up to reply #17 and all you can do is babble over words.
    Page, topic who cares!! It is a topic on a page you started!

    Start a grammar topic or get back to the subject thank you!!

    What *scientific explanation put the planets together

    Between the two cells to human form what are the steps in between
  • Jul 14, 2008, 06:46 AM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    I simply asked you 2 questions What *scientific explanation put the planets together . Between the two cells to human form what are the steps in between
    Neither question has anything to do with "The origin of the Universe and religion", and "Evolution and religion" - which are the topics here.

    If you really want to know the answer to your cosmological question on how planets came into being, ask that at the science board (where I will reply to it from a scientific perspective).

    If you really want to know the answer to your evolution question on in between steps of evolution, ask that at the science board too (where I again will reply to it from a scientific perspective).

    Here your questions have nothing to do with the topic of "Evolution" and religion, or "Origin of the Universe" and religion.

    The issue here is : does any religious approach towards scientific topics make any logical sense, as religious belief is based on hot air, while science is based on objective supported evidence ?

    ;)

    ·


    PS : I'll be back later : I have better things to do with my time at this moment !

    ;)

    ·
  • Jul 14, 2008, 06:51 AM
    N0help4u
    Then why the heck did you post the topic here
    Sounds like you were just looking for me to argue religion with you since this is now not the proper board for you to give me an answer. Sorry I do not argue religion I state my belief/ take it or leave it.


    does any religious approach towards scientific topics make any logical sense, as religious belief is based on hot air, while science is based on objective supported evidence ?

    Since this is your topic here I have no idea why you ever brought MY name into it. OR stated N0help4u asked me elsewhere to explain as to how I believe this earth came into being. ---Put together/came into being.

    If your purpose was to answer my questions and you already must of decided that this was not the board to answer my questions then you were just looking for a debate. I have already stated several times the answer to your question.
  • Jul 14, 2008, 03:21 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by N0help4u
    Then why the heck did you post the topic here
    And why do you follow me around the board with your criticism?

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Jul 19, 2008, 06:00 PM
    inthebox
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    That is the beauty of science : it has a sort of build-in checking program that ensures that the latest findings can be included in the scientific arguments.

    That is indeed different than a period of over 2000 years of dogmatic wild claims that may not be debated, while there is not one single iota of objective supporting evidence for any of the dogmatic claims. Give me therefore science any second of the day above all that religious hot air !

    As to the rest of your post : if you want to discuss the general approach towards science and scientific findings and theories: go ahead. If you want to continue with your anti-scientific approach please go to the Christianity board where there are a lot of creationist peers !

    :D · · :rolleyes: · · :p · · ;) · · :D

    · ·

    Like evolution - not to be debated
    Like global warming - not to be debated
    Both examples of scientific intolerance


    As to your second point - resorting to personal attacks and generalizing is clearly not scientific. :D
  • Jul 19, 2008, 06:28 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by inthebox
    Like evolution and global warming. Both examples of scientific intolerance As to your second point - resorting to personal attacks and generalizing is clearly not scientific.
    Who says these are not to be debated? Not I.
    All I say is that science related theories are based on peer checking programs and rules that ensure that the latest findings are included, which guarantee an ever increasing higher level of support.

    That is different than the procedure with religious dogmatic wild claims that may not be debated at all, while there is not one single iota of objective supporting evidence for any of these claims.

    You and some of your peers want to attack scientific theories, but show great tension when the basis of any religious view is questioned. Now THAT is hypocrite!!

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Jul 19, 2008, 06:59 PM
    inthebox
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    Evolution is just a physical process involving evolution, biology, and lot's of time.

    ·

    The question of evolution was brought up by your opening question. I'm just asking you to explain the above :D , no need for the usual religious attacks, it gets tiresome.
  • Jul 19, 2008, 08:03 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    Evolution is just a physical process involving evolution, biology, and lot's of time.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by inthebox
    The question of evolution was brought up by your opening question. I'm just asking you to explain the above :D , no need for the usual religious attacks, it gets tiresome.
    What is there more to explain? A child of 10 can understand that. Why don't you explain here where your problem is in understanding this?

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Jul 20, 2008, 02:09 PM
    inthebox
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    What is there more to explain? A child of 10 can understand that. Why don't you explain here where your problem is in understanding this?

    :rolleyes:

    ·

    https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/religi...ml#post1148394

    Circular logic:D
  • Jul 20, 2008, 04:50 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by inthebox
    Circular logic
    I asked you : "Why don't you explain here where your problem is in understanding this?"
    I note that you failed to reply that non-circular question, the essence of my previous point.

    Not that I am surprised you don't...

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Jul 24, 2008, 11:27 PM
    De Maria
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    N0help4u asked me elsewhere to explain as to how I believe this earth came into being.

    Well : as belief has religious connotations,
    Only for you. Belief is a very ordinary secular word with a secular definition:

    Definitions of belief on the Web:

    * any cognitive content held as true
    * impression: a vague idea in which some confidence is placed; "his impression of her was favorable"; "what are your feelings about the crisis?"; "it strengthened my belief in his sincerity"; "I had a feeling that she was lying"
    Wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

    Quote:
    I do not BELIEVE that the earth came into being by any deity doing a once-only job in only 6 days. Mainly because I do not see any need for deities to exist, nor objective supported evidence for the existence of such deities.
    In other words, you don't believe that God created the world because you don't believe in God.

    However that leaves the converse as also true. You believe that the earth came into being without God. Because if you hold any idea as true, then you believe that idea.

    Quote:
    Evolution is just a physical process involving evolution, biology, and lot's of time.
    And you've seen this? Or do you hold this idea as true even though you have not seen it happen with your own eyes?

    Quote:
    The origin of the universe is a cosmological process involving also lot's of time.
    And you've seen this as well? Or do you hold this idea as true although you have not seen it?

    Quote:
    If people like Nohelp4u want to know more about evolution , why don't they ask for that? And if people like Nohelp4u want to know more about the origin of the universe, why don't they ask for that?
    Obviously, it is because you have put yourself in the unreasonable position of claiming to hold no beliefs. Yet you have beliefs whether you like it or not.

    Quote:
    Why always ask indirect questions, and combine that with a religious connotation like the "belief" argument ?
    Obviously, you don't know what belief means or you don't accept the common definition of the word. Apparently you are trying to force your reductionist definition of that word upon us. But we live in the real world. All we have to do is open a dictionary to see that you are misusing the word "belief".

    Sincerely,

    De Maria
  • Jul 24, 2008, 11:54 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by De Maria
    Only for you....
    I almost always and only make such statements on board related to religion, and I almost always refer clearly to belief of religious claims, and where not specific to religious belief, the link to religion is obvious from the context of my position. After all : one may after thousands of times making the same statements at times slip on on something.

    Only those who have problems with the (clarity of my) statements on religious belief would go as low as you do now in the hope that I would change my position, or can be proved wrong. I will not, and never will. I simply do not believe in religious matters, and note in that respect that never ever has there been any objective supporting evidence provided for the correctness of the existence of the Christian god (and any other god/gods), and that god is the Creator. Without that support any religion - except Buddhism - is nothing more than hot empty air!!

    But you are free to search the Internet for statements from my hand that supports your suggestion. It will be in vain, as I never changed my approach. The reason why so many theists hate my guts as they know my arguments are sound and beyond denying.
    Only you, Nohelp4u, sassyT, and few other religious blinded still have to learn that...

    :D :rolleyes: :p ;) :D

    ·
  • Jul 26, 2008, 04:16 PM
    inthebox
    Cred

    You have that evangelical fervor in your belief that there is no God, and you go on these religious boards proclaiming that; then you wonder why we argue with you :confused:

    We, who believe, know that Jesus died for you, to give you salvation. If I truly disliked you, I would not try to tell you of this. :D
  • Jul 27, 2008, 08:18 AM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by inthebox
    Cred You have that evangelical fervor in your belief that there is no God, and you go on these religious boards proclaiming that; then you wonder why we argue with you .... We, who believe, know that Jesus died for you, to give you salvation. If I truly disliked you, I would not try to tell you of this.
    As always TOTAL NONSENSE !!!
    I never have claimed there is no god. I observe, conclude, and state that there is no objective supporting evidence for the existence of any god, deity, or other supra-natural entity.

    I do NEITHER wonder why you argue with me. I know why you do. I wonder why you theist guys and girls have so much problems admitting that you only BELIEVE whatever you believe, and that belief is not another word for reality...

    You, who believes (in what?), do NOT know that Jesus died for you. You BELIEVE that Jesus died for you. And you BELIEVE that Jesus is God's son, and that Jesus is part of the Christian godly trinity.

    And about that dislike : your actions and your word selection speaks "another language".

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Jul 28, 2008, 05:58 PM
    savedsinner7
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    N0help4u asked me elsewhere to explain as to how I believe this earth came into being.

    Well : as belief has religious connotations, I do not BELIEVE that the earth came into being by any deity doing a once-only job in only 6 days. Mainly because I do not see any need for deities to exist, nor objective supported evidence for the existence of such deities.

    Evolution is just a physical process involving evolution, biology, and lot's of time.
    The origin of the universe is a cosmological process involving also lot's of time.
    If people like Nohelp4u want to know more about evolution , why don't they ask for that?
    And if people like Nohelp4u want to know more about the origin of the universe, why don't they ask for that?
    Why always ask indirect questions, and combine that with a religious connotation like the "belief" argument ?

    :)

    ·
    Be·lief Audio Help /bɪˈlif/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bi-leef] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
    –noun 1. something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.
    2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.
    3. confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.
    4. a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.


    From dictionary.com




    Please understand that what you are saying is your belief.
  • Aug 3, 2008, 07:26 AM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by savedsinner7
    ...Please understand that what you are saying is your belief.
    Please understand that on this specific board any reference to personal BELIEF refers to religious belief, unless clearly stated otherwise.

    Of course I have personal beliefs. From political views to favoritism for sports teams to personal preferences.
    But I have no religious belief. I do not claim the existence of any entity. Neither do I claim the non-existence of any entity. All I ask is for objective supporting evidence for any religious claim. So far there has never been anything towards that been forthcoming (although there were more than enough claims!)...

    :D :D :D :D :D

    ·
  • Aug 3, 2008, 07:47 PM
    savedsinner7
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    Please understand that on this specific board any reference to personal BELIEF refers to religious belief, unless clearly stated otherwise.

    Of course I have personal beliefs. From political views to favoritism for sports teams to personal preferences.
    But I have no religious belief. I do not claim the existence of any entity. Neither do I claim the non-existence of any entity. All I ask is for objective supporting evidence for any religious claim. So far there has never been anything towards that been forthcoming (although there were more than enough claims!) ....

    :D :D :D :D :D

    ·
    So, you're believing to be undecided?
  • Aug 4, 2008, 12:15 AM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by savedsinner7
    So, you're believing to be undecided?
    Not really. My logic and all my senses say that God does not exist. But I can not prove a negative. Not too bad, as all theists together have been unable to prove over 2000+ years the much easier positive claim that God/Gods exist neither.
    However - unlike any theist - I do not want to make statements that I can not support.

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Aug 4, 2008, 06:08 AM
    savedsinner7
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Credendovidis
    Not really. My logic and all my senses say that God does not exist. But I can not prove a negative. Not too bad, as all theists together have been unable to prove over 2000+ years the much easier positive claim that God/Gods exist neither.
    However - unlike any theist - I do not want to make statements that I can not support.

    :rolleyes:

    ·
    So you're believing to not believe? Your faith is in your logic?
  • Aug 4, 2008, 12:46 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by savedsinner7
    So you're believing to not believe? Your faith is in your logic?
    You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. I clearly stated :

    "My logic and all my senses say that God does not exist. But I can not prove a negative. Not too bad, as all theists together have been unable to prove over 2000+ years the much easier positive claim that God/Gods exist neither. However - unlike any theist - I do not want to make statements that I can not support."

    I do not believe that god/gods exist, and I do not believe that god/gods do not exist.
    My logic says that god/gods do not exist as there is not one single iota of evidence for that existence. I know that I can not prove either position, so I just do not keep any religious beliefs.

    And no : I do not believe not to believe. But unlike an Agnostic I do not doubt neither.
    I just do not want to make statements that I can not support!

    :D :rolleyes: :p ;) :D

    ·
  • Aug 4, 2008, 12:57 PM
    mountain_man
    Cred,

    We BELIEVE that Christ died for all of our salvation because it is written as a factual occurrence in the bestselling (and proven) book in the world "the BIBLE" Just as the "theory" of evolution is written in a book or handed down by word of mouth and you believe their (the scientists) account of things.

    One question regarding evolution, Where did the very first molecule/cell, etc come from that started this whole process? There has to be some beginning distinguished from the rest of the process, right?
  • Aug 4, 2008, 01:20 PM
    Credendovidis
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mountain_man
    We BELIEVE that Christ died for all of our salvation ...
    Yes, you believe that. But the essence of Christianity is that Jesus could provide that function because he was claimed to be God's son.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mountain_man
    One question regarding evolution, Where did the very first molecule/cell, etc come from that started this whole process?
    The first cell is not part of evolution, but of abiogenesis.
    Evolution is about how that frist cell managed to become the source of all life on earth.

    Darwin never bothered where that first cell came from. I do neither, but there are several excellent thesis about that, involving the extremely interesting features of crystaline clay. Google yourself to the information... Lot's of information available on the Internet !

    :rolleyes:

    ·
  • Aug 4, 2008, 01:25 PM
    mountain_man
    Interesting so in evolution there is no beginning and no end...

    Which is completely contrary to God as his existence is the Alpha and the Omega (the beginning and the end)

    Do you not find it interesting that Darwin and yourself "don't bother" with that little piece missing from evolution?

    • All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:07 PM.
    Page 1 of 6 1 > Last»
    Show %1$s post(s) from this question on one page