Faith-Hope-Lies

Originally posted by Wulebgr
You keep generalizing from this particular instance. There are many things that I understand, but do not believe (George Bush's explanations of why we are in Iraq, for example). The theory of evolution is simply not the sort of thing that is disbelieved by those that understand it: that is the nature of theory in science, as it happens.

scottishinnz has been clear enough on this point.

You are using the Christian argument:

I believe it is possible to understand the theory of macro evolution and not agree with it.

We are at a stalemate

Originally posted by scottishinnz
No, it is not. It is an explanation.

you are right it is an explanation, an explanation you believe

Originally posted by ryunix
I didn’t initiate the debate or argument with him (or any of you actually) and I have little intention on being the one to do the research for him.

There are now 3 of you who are all picking different things to debate me on, this is also not practiced in a formal debate so seeing how I now have 3 vs. 1, finding links for all of you is a tad ridiculous. (Which i will have to do if i make any claims)

You did make a claim.

Originally posted by ryunix
you are right it is an explanation, an explanation you believe

In as much as I know it to be true, based on a body of experimental evidence.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
In as much as I know it to be true, based on a body of experimental evidence.

Ok so we agree evolution is a belief of yours. Hopefully you can see how that has shaped you in some way

Originally posted by scottishinnz
You did make a claim.

That is correct i made a claim and i just explained how i will not be finding information for others, which is something i would have to do if i made a claim that was challenged.

My past phrasing was not ideal, my appologys.

Originally posted by ryunix
Ok so we agree evolution is a belief of yours. Hopefully you can see how that has shaped you in some way

Provided that you also accept that we are accepting belief every time we accept that the universe is real. "Belief" in evolution is on the same par as belief in existence.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Provided that you also accept that we are accepting belief every time we accept that the universe is real. "Belief" in evolution is on the same par as belief in existence.

Yes i agree, accepting that the universe is real, is a belief

However,

"Belief" in evolution is on the same par as belief in existence

Is something I do not hold as a belief.

Originally posted by ryunix
Yes i agree, accepting that the universe is real, is a belief

However,

[b]"Belief" in evolution is on the same par as belief in existence

Is something I do not hold as a belief.[/b]

Doesn't stop it from being true though. There still remains a small, but very committed, group that believes the earth is flat.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Doesn't stop it from being true though. There still remains a small, but very committed, group that believes the earth is flat.

HAHA i visited their website for fun not to long ago.

I will say that i believe that the theory of macro evolution exists, i just dont believe it is correct, but dont worry your claim of the "true" does not make it true. 🙂

Originally posted by ryunix
HAHA i visited their website for fun not to long ago.

I will say that i believe that the theory of macro evolution exists, i just dont believe it is correct, but dont worry your claim of the "true" does not make it true. 🙂

True, but the evidence is all on my side!

Originally posted by ryunix
www.google.ca

Oh and nice comments on the abortion topic... I'm not referring to the "eating them all and make it hurt" comment, though is was rather humorous

Thanks for the compliment!

Your address to a search engine did not provide any such examples. I think you're full of crap.

Originally posted by ryunix
I didn’t initiate the debate or argument with him (or any of you actually) and I have little intention on being the one to do the research for him.

There are now 3 of you who are all picking different things to debate me on, this is also not practiced in a formal debate so seeing how I now have 3 vs. 1, finding links for all of you is a tad ridiculous. (Which i will have to do if i make any claims)

I'm simply asking you to explain something you wrote. Are you unable to do that?

Originally posted by ryunix
That is correct i made a claim and i just explained how i will not be finding information for others, which is something i would have to do if i made a claim that was challenged.

My past phrasing was not ideal, my appologys.

I challenge your claim! The gauntlet is thrown!

Originally posted by ryunix
I didn’t initiate the debate or argument with him (or any of you actually) and I have little intention on being the one to do the research for him.

You brought in your "disbelief" in scientific theory to support an obscure point about the nature of sin and behavior in this thread about a Christian clan evidently cheating more than others. You are the threadjacker.

But, as i pointed out, it may well be that people afflicted with the errors in reasoning that leads to affinity with the Creationist delusion may be more inclined to cheat when in a tough spot. It is no more than a hypothesis that yet needs testing.

An alternative hypothesis might be that FAITH HOPE LOVE has been infiltrated by evil players who plan to cheat and get banned for the purpose of giving Xtians a bad name. (Somewhat in the way that the FBI infiltrated civil rights organizations in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Google COINTELPRO if you are unfamiliar with this particular history.)