Evangelicals & Jesus

[BubberMiley]

I guess that must be true since it shows the religious atheists - evidenced by their behaviour in mature discussions, and their way of reasoning - are actually the missing link between ape and God's religious man!

My main problem with religion is apparent in this quote: some people are only interested in it so they can pretend they're better than the rest of us.

[bloodyminded]

Jonsa and Bloodyminded, let's have a little recap here:

bloodyminded, on 21 March 2011 - 10:17 AM, said:

let me clarify:

I never said we aren't related to monkeys.

What I said was we are not descended from chimpanzees.

Can you really not understand the distinction?

If Jonsa disagreed with Bishop Dawkins, Bloodyminded disagrees with the Science Daily:

Quote

ScienceDaily (May 15, 2005) — ITHACA, N.Y. -- Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor, and even today 99 percent of the two species' DNA is identical.

Betsy. I tried, honestly, to be clear. You honestly believe you've unearthed some towering contradiction...but that's because you are not being careful; you are not showing people the respect of carefully reading their words.

One more time (and this in not one single way disagrees with Dawkins, or with the ScienceDaily bit you offer):

I am saying we are related to chimpanzees.

I have never said otherwise.

What I said (and you quoted me, so you should know) was this:

We are not descended from chimpanzees.

Do you see? "Related" versus "descended."

If there's a God, you will truly, finally get my point. I honestly don't think it's a difficult one to understand.

[dre]

Ha-ha-ha! Oh yes it is!

Complete with a choir....the Adhominem doo-wap choir! ha-ha-ha!

Good! You acknowledge evolution is not a fact!

True. And they could not figure it out! That's the point, isn't it?

And like my sources claim, they are now considering Intelligent Design.

No. Others' understanding is getting better and more advanced. They're thinking and looking outside the box!

Yours - and those who belong to your sect - however, remain close-minded.

Babblings and deflections! Look in the mirror!

Once upon a time, there was an ugly frog. He found time. Time kissed him and he magically transformed into man.

or better yet...

From fish to amphibean to reptiles to mammals. Where is the bloody evidence?

Of course those desperate to fill in the gaps say...well the evolution happened at a fast rate.

I guess that must be true since it shows the religious atheists - evidenced by their behaviour in mature discussions, and their way of reasoning - are actually the missing link between ape and God's religious man!

Thats just all lame-brained trolling.

Where is the bloody evidence?

You dont even know what evidence is. Wheres the evidence for your talking snake?

[Jack Weber]

Thats just all lame-brained trolling.

You dont even know what evidence is. Wheres the evidence for your talking snake?

Talking snake???

[cybercoma]

Once upon a time, there was an ugly frog. He found time. Time kissed him and he magically transformed into man.

or better yet...

From fish to amphibean to reptiles to mammals. Where is the bloody evidence?

Of course those desperate to fill in the gaps say...well the evolution happened at a fast rate.

I guess that must be true since it shows the religious atheists - evidenced by their behaviour in mature discussions, and their way of reasoning - are actually the missing link between ape and God's religious man!

I have a serious question for you: have you ever honestly sat down and tried to understand evolutionary theory? There are many clear and easy-to-understand books written on the subject.

I'm not sure how a person could understand evolution and make the kind of false statements that you are making. Perhaps your lack of understanding on the subject is why you're so aggressively anti-evolution.

[dre]

I have a serious question for you: have you ever honestly sat down and tried to understand evolutionary theory? There are many clear and easy-to-understand books written on the subject.

I'm not sure how a person could understand evolution and make the kind of false statements that you are making. Perhaps your lack of understanding on the subject is why you're so aggressively anti-evolution.

Shes against evolution for the same reason the church persecuted Galileo when he challenged the church doctrine that the earth was the center of the universe. He was banned from ever speaking about it, his books on the subject were banned, and he spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

In this case its evolution that threatens established church doctrine, and what we see play out is the modern day equivalent of the church VS Galileo and heliocentrism.

Lucky for us the church cant ban books or arrest people today... but you still see the same theme. They basically try to tar and feather holders of the dissenting view. And you can see this in Betsy's wild rants. She doesnt just challenge evolution, she assigns a nefarious motive to evolutionists and creates wild conspiracy theories about how "the scientists" are a bunch of people with some spooky adgenda, and they are lying about believing in evolution, and have hatched some kind of nefarious plot to "lie to our children".

[GostHacked]

UH OH !!!

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/29/creationists-claim-humans-lived-dinosaurs-scientists-disagree/?test=faces

"The most important implication of these findings is that one of the creationist camp's favorite piece of 'evidence' for the coexistence of dinosaurs and humans — a dinosaur petroglyph — doesn't even exist," researcher Phil Senter, a paleontologist at Fayetteville State University in North Carolina, told LiveScience

"The 'dinos' other than Sinclair do not look like dinos at all, even with the naked eye," Senter added. "It is difficult for me to understand how anyone saw dinosaurs in those figures." In fact, the researchers say the four Kachina "dinosaurs" are "illusions produced by pareidolia," the psychological phenomenon responsible for people seeing faces or animals in clouds and the man in the moon.

[Oleg Bach]

There is a female Evangelist that is on telivison in the morning - she paces back and forth across her grand stage as if she has total god given authority.... I can't stand her....after 30 years of telivised evangelism...NOTHING has been accomplished by these people - government is still corrupt...deception of clients in buisness is acceptable practice...and courts jailing the weak and disadvantaged while rewarding the powerful and wicked...I believe that these jerks who utter the name of Jesus repeatedly are evil....What else could they be...if they were good..there would be evidence of progress on a moral level in the world - and there is no such evidence to date.

[betsy]

Betsy. I tried, honestly, to be clear. You honestly believe you've unearthed some towering contradiction...but that's because you are not being careful; you are not showing people the respect of carefully reading their words.

One more time (and this in not one single way disagrees with Dawkins, or with the ScienceDaily bit you offer):

I am saying we are related to chimpanzees.

I have never said otherwise.

What I said (and you quoted me, so you should know) was this:

We are not descended from chimpanzees.

Do you see? "Related" versus "descended."

If there's a God, you will truly, finally get my point. I honestly don't think it's a difficult one to understand.

There is indeed God, Bloodyminded....that's why I'm still patient and in fact will explain this one more time.

I know what you mean. Okay, let's trace our way back to the smoking gun.

I told Dre to "say hello to her uncle." She replied by saying "my uncle is the snake and hers is the chimp." We're both talking "uncles." We're clearly talking "relations."

Then Jonsa came on the scene, he quoted Dre and boomed:

Anyone who ridicules the theory of evolution by asserting that humans are descendant from monkeys or apes simply demonstrates their utter lack of knowledge and understanding.

He was the first one to introduce descendant. He associated "uncles" to "descendants."

You quoted Jonsa. Instead of correcting Jonsa that Dre was talking about being related to a chimp....you said Dre was just being humorous and knows he didn't descend from the chimp!

Granted you were just reiterating that we didn't descend from the chimp, but by not correcting Jonsa there was that implied non-difference in meaning between "related" and "descended."

So why would I think there's a big difference in scientific meaning between ancestors, relations and descendants? That you could get boomed at for using the wrong term? That it's blasphemy....sacrilegious to use the wrong term!

Whew, good thing it was Dre who took the heat.

The only ones who mentioned the word descended were Jonsa and you.

Anyway, reprimand Jonsa! He started this. And you too - you're not exactly off the hook you know. You went along with him.

Edited April 2, 2011 by betsy

[ToadBrother]

Granted you were just reiterating that we didn't descend from the chimp, but by not correcting Jonsa there was that implied

Anybody with even a passing knowledge of hominid and hominoid evolution knows we didn't descend from chimps, we and chimps descended from a common ancestor. You're not descended from your sibling, but you're both descended from your parents.

[betsy]

Anybody with even a passing knowledge of hominid and hominoid evolution knows we didn't descend from chimps, we and chimps descended from a common ancestor. You're not descended from your sibling, but you're both descended from your parents.

Within the context of my post, what's your point?

[bloodyminded]

There is indeed God, Bloodyminded....that's why I'm still patient and in fact will explain this one more time.

I know what you mean. Okay, let's trace our way back to the smoking gun.

I told Dre to "say hello to her uncle." She replied by saying "my uncle is the snake and hers is the chimp." We're both talking "uncles." We're clearly talking "relations."

Then Jonsa came on the scene, he quoted Dre and boomed:

He was the first one to introduce descendant. He associated "uncles" to "descendants."

You quoted Jonsa. Instead of correcting Jonsa that Dre was talking about being related to a chimp....you said Dre was just being humorous and knows he didn't descend from the chimp!

Granted you were just reiterating that we didn't descend from the chimp, but by not correcting Jonsa there was that implied non-difference in meaning between "related" and "descended."

So you're arguing semantics.

So why would I think there's a big difference in scientific meaning between ancestors, relations and descendants?

Because--and this is not a controversial point, nor even an arguable one--you can be (and are) related to certain people without being descended from them.

That you could get boomed at for using the wrong term? That it's blasphemy....sacrilegious to use the wrong term!

Whew, good thing it was Dre who took the heat.

The only ones who mentioned the word descended were Jonsa and you.

Anyway, reprimand Jonsa! He started this. And you too - you're not exactly off the hook you know. You went along with him.

Then consider myself reprimanded, if that helps you.

[Oleg Bach]

Was it not Jesus who fashioned a whip - and beat the crap out of the banking class - and the evangelicals of the day? People wonder what the most offensive thing that Christ did when it came to dealing with society and it's weasils...It was not that he had declared himself king or the son of God - It was because he messed with their economy. Now today the modern evangelical leader is a banker...they are all very wealthy. I wonder if Christ was to appear this second if he would not use a whip...but perhaps a very big piece of lead piping?