International creationism

[TheStinger]

A reply to an earlier post

Where in the bible does it say oh don't worry about this bit its just a metaphor. How do i know which bits are literal and which are not.

Is there an apendix I'm missing

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Rogan:

I think you have confused creationism with something else... Possibly with what Lincoln claims creationism to be.

No. It doesn't matter what the definition is. If one has an omnipotent diety who can manipulate the universe any way he likes (otherwise he wouldn't be omnipotent), then none of the evidence for evolution as the origin of species is 100% trustworthy. In other words, God could have put the fossils in the ground for us to find. He could have set up the DNA structures of living beings to make it look like they evolved from common ancestors. He could have made up every peice of evidence for evolution as a test of faith for us.

I don't actually believe this - I am playing the role of 'Devil's Advocate'. I am not even saying that this is a reasonable thing to believe on a scientific level (since it is non-predicitive), but it could be true. Furthermore, since one can never prove whether it is true or not, it is a religious belief.

[CyberGnu]

I'm sorry, Rogan, but to do that he would have to be essentially nihilistic. If he is willing to believe that an omnipotent deity actually faked evidence rather than accept something as simple as evolution, where would he draw the line? "Hmm, it doesn't seem my experiment went as I predicted... Well, my originial hypothesis is still correct, but the omnipotent deity changed the results to test my faith". You see where this is heading, I assume...

Look, you don't have to be atheist to be a scientist. But you do have to understand and accept basic tenets of science. Accepting that an omnipotent deity changed stuff for his own inscrutable ends is not among those tenets.

[Lincoln]

If there is an omnipotent God who actively intervenes into the affairs of the universe then scientists cannot say that there is even such a thing as evolution. If God himself manipulates the supposed mutations and if he causes the conditions to be such that one animal group survives and another perishes then the whole idea of Darwinism is a joke. I am not saying that there is not truth in evolution but science must exclude the possibility of God or their observations prove nothing but what God let's us prove. The main reason why Dawinism must be protected at all costs is because it is the only hope of the atheist. He must pretend that there is no God or he is out of a job! As soon as it becomes clear that there really is a God then he must admit that virtually anything is possible including manipulation of the speed of light and the laws of physics. Early scientists tried to discover how exactly God did things. Now days it is in vogue to pretend that no one ever did anything and the abstract being named "evolution" is omnipotent!

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Lincoln
The main reason why Dawinism must be protected at all costs is because it is the only hope of the atheist. He must pretend that there is no God or he is out of a job!

Who's out of a job, the atheist, or the scientist? (I assume you mean the former, but I didn't know that "atheist" is a job, any more than "theist" is a job.)

Also, how does evolution disprove the existence of God? If it doesn't disprove the existence of God, then why are you so hung up about it? Why aren't you as hung up about palientology or astronomy or geology or any of the other evil atheist sciences that disagree with the Bible?

BTW, do you really believe that we evil pot-smoking atheists just sit around cackling and coming up with evil (and pot-smoking) plans to try to disprove the existence of God (because of course we evil pot-smoking atheists actually believe in God, but we hate Him because we're evil, so we try to pretend that we don't believe in Him), or are you just trolling?

[Lincoln]

I don't remember mentioning "pot smoking atheists"

Also I don't remember saying that "evolution disproves the existence of God". And I am not "hung up about it". I actually believe that many parts of the theory are valid. I just find it intersting that it has become the god of many atheists and they subscribe to it omnipotent powers. Also, I did not call anyone who disagrees with me "evil". Now do you have a question?

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Now do you have a question?

No, your post has pretty much already answered it.

[Ramo]

If there's an invisible pink unicorn named Bob that every nanosecond injects us with undetectable drugs that cause us to believe in this reality, then the whole idea of a hamburger is crap. The main reason why the existence of hamburgers must be protected at all costs is that it's the only hope of unbelievers of Bob. He must pretend there is no Bob or he's out of a job! As soon as it's clear Bob exists, virtually everything is possible. Nowadays it's vogue to pretend Bob really hasn't done anything and that these imaginary things called hamburgers are omnipotent.

[loinburger]

Hey, no fair using a copycat troll! You must be high or something if you can't see that Lincoln's troll is self-evidently better than yours!

[Ramo]

But baiting Creationists is so fun!

Beware the omnipotent hamburgers. They're going to take over the world!!!

[loinburger]

Snoggo the Wonder Rainbow is gonna kick their asses!

[Ramo]

But he isn't omnipotent. Clearly, he's inferior.

[GePap]

I wonder if buddhist hould be qualified as aetheists: after all, they don't believe in a single, sentient entity that willfully creates and rules the universe and creation..

Damn aethistic Buddhist scumbag priests!

And lets not get started on the Heathen hindu and their moneky gods!

[Ramo]

Of course, the ten feet tall white rabbit ownz both. Feed the hare.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Ramo
But he isn't omnipotent. Clearly, he's inferior.

He's not omnipotent? I feel so used!