323d
@divegeester said… let alone the Bible.
No one has said that.
No one here, no scientist, no book. Ever.
What is clear from this thread that you don’t even understand natural selection let alone the evolution of species.
322d
@kellyjay saidSo on the one hand you accept evolution as scientific fact, but on the other hand you don't actually think it happens. I don't think you know what you think.
Small changes over time do not translate into wholesale changes over time. Accepting small changes in existing systems and features does not mean new systems and features will arise due to them.
322d
@indonesia-phil saidThe word carries different meanings than just one, not sure why you find this difficult to grasp. It can mean changing over time which no one disagrees with. How far those types of changes can go is a matter of controversy. You seem to think it only means one thing, that is not the case.
So on the one hand you accept evolution as scientific fact, but on the other hand you don't actually think it happens. I don't think you know what you think.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
322d
@kellyjay saidSo you accept that species evolve through natural selection?
The word carries different meanings than just one, not sure why you find this difficult to grasp. It can mean changing over time which no one disagrees with. How far those types of changes can go is a matter of controversy. You seem to think it only means one thing, that is not the case.
322d
@moonbus saidYou don't know anything about any of the scriptures by your own rules, so whatever you tell me is as meaningless as your views about them. I accept the signatures on them and that they were addressed to people, I accept the historical proofs related to the scriptures, you got I wasn't there, therefore I don't know...powerfully put.
I know that not one of the gospels was written by an eyewitness to a resurrection.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
322d
KellyJay: I’m ignoring you
divegeester: well not really, as you’re reading my posts
KellyJay: I posted to some else that I wasn’t reading your posts
divegeester: but replied to one of my posts calling me a “liar” again a little while back so you must be reading them
KellyJay:
divegeester: KellyJay?
KellyJay:
divegeester: you concurred with me a while back the bible is not the inerrant, complete and exclusive word of god…
KellJay: liar!
divegeester: you just read that post!
KellyJay:
divegeester: if you are reading my posts then a) you lied when you said you weren’t, and b) you’re not actually ignoring me, are you?
KellyJay: ignoring means not replying to you.
divegeester: well that’s fine with me as your posts are furballs of doubling down nonsense and it means I can give you my thoughts to read, but I don’t have to read your replies.
KellyJay:
322d
1 edit
@kellyjay saidNot one of the gospel authors was there either. And that’s telling. Mark’s was the earliest gospel, and he never knew Jesus. Most biblical scholars put the composition of Mark’s gospel no earlier than 80 AD, some as late as 110 AD. That is a huge gap.
You don't know anything about any of the scriptures by your own rules, so whatever you tell me is as meaningless as your views about them. I accept the signatures on them and that they were addressed to people, I accept the historical proofs related to the scriptures, you got I wasn't there, therefore I don't know...powerfully put.
If someone told you he had been abducted by space aliens and his brain transplanted into another body, would you believe that, just on somebody’s say so? Now, suppose somebody told you that somebody else was kidnapped by space aliens, and somebody else’s brain was transplanted into another body, but he didn’t really see it himself. He just heard about it 2000 years ago. How credulous can you get?
322d
@moonbus saidYou were not there so for you there is no way you can make any pronouncements on the validity by your standards, repeatedly saying you can’t know doesn’t change anything.
Not one of the gospel authors was there either. And that’s telling. Mark’s was the earliest gospel, and he never knew Jesus. Most biblical scholars put the composition of Mark’s gospel no earlier than 80 AD, some as late as 110 AD. That is a huge gap.
If someone told you he had been abducted by space aliens and his brain transplanted into another body, would you believe th ...[text shortened]... t he didn’t really see it himself. He just heard about it 2000 years ago. How credulous can you get?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
@kellyjay saidOh my gosh … you WERE there!
You were not there so for you there is no way you can make any pronouncements on the validity by your standards, repeatedly saying you can’t know doesn’t change anything.
KellyJay, why didn’t you say this earlier? Our whole relationship would be so much more affable.