Why are you an Atheist today? (doctrine, demon, evolutionary, origin)

[mgt04]

Originally Posted by c'est la vie

It's the atheistic faith.

Their god is man, just like every liberal and atheist I know.

Liberalism and atheism lead to setting up man as a god.

Look at the messianic treatment of the current CiC.

Lol I'm an atheist who is by no means anywhere near what you would call a liberal.

You remind me of the scary Jehovah witnesses who walked up my driveway one day while I was washing my car and felt the need to push their ideals on me and argue everything with me when all I wanted to be was left alone to wash my car lol....nutjobs you all are

I'm still waiting for your answer Cest la vie on why you believe in a God who allows his priests to molest little children. The way you're making such farfetched links between atheists and communists and liberals well then by the same means you're a child molester supporter. You also favor dictatorship and worship Hitler. You favor banning all books, movies, literature that presents anything other than your religion. You believe in persecution of people who think differently than you.

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by broadbill

Just because the majority of Americans believe something to be true, does not make it automatically true.

I agree. And I haven't stated or implied that it did.

Why don't you go back a few pages and read the context, and why this was brought up?

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by scarmig

I don't think that was the case I was arguing. You made a statement regarding human nature. I took it to task. Debating human nature is not attacking the messenger.

I didn't say you had attacked anyone. Notice 'they', other evolutionists , are who I am referring to.

But since you know a lot about human nature, I asked your opinion. Why do evolutionists more often than not resort to insults and ad homs instead of citing data?

I should just request that evolutionists answer with a number to save time because that's eventually where most of their responses seem to lead.

I know very few evolutionists who make an effort to cite data once they know you have serious disagreement with them. If they think you can be easily won, they'll spin out some arguments based largely on inference and circumstantial data. But if you dare question them, God help you. It's the wrath of Khan for you boy, you bad creationist you.

I could simply add to my signature:

Evolutionists, please respond "1" for "you guys are stupid'. Please respond "2" for 'you guys are crazy'. Please respond "3" for 'you guys are liars'.

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by mgt04

Lol I'm an atheist who is by no means anywhere near what you would call a liberal.

I didn't say you were.

I said atheism and liberalism lead to the same thing.

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by scarmig

talking about a book 2 hours a week

Now I know you haven't been in many churches if that's all you think a pastor does.

[mgt04]

Originally Posted by c'est la vie

I didn't say you had attacked anyone. Notice 'they', other evolutionists , are who I am referring to.

But since you know a lot about human nature, I asked your opinion. Why do evolutionists more often than not resort to insults and ad homs instead of citing data?

I should just request that evolutionists answer with a number to save time because that's eventually where most of their responses seem to lead.

I know very few evolutionists who make an effort to cite data once they know you have serious disagreement with them. If they think you can be easily won, they'll spin out some arguments based largely on inference and circumstantial data. But if you dare question them, God help you. It's the wrath of Khan for you boy, you bad creationist you.

I could simply add to my signature:

Evolutionists, please respond "1" for "you guys are stupid'. Please respond "2" for 'you guys are crazy'. Please respond "3" for 'you guys are liars'.

Its funny because Christians have no data either. You have a book called a bible that was rewritten over time even by Kings (people who were just in charge). Mostly everything over time that could be remotely considered threatening to the Christian religion was either locked up in the Vatican vault or burned or people even killed (hence the Crusades).

History was written by whoever was in charge and had the most power. So all manuscripts and literature saved from back in the day of course will support Christianity.

I actually believe that there was a person named Jesus Christ who was a person of high importance back in the day but nothing divine about him or coming from a God.

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by scarmig

And yet in those 6 hours a day, 5 days a week, 9 months a year for 12 years, they are taught scientific evolution for approximately 40 hours. Total.

And this is somehow the fault of creationists?

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by mgt04

Its funny because Christians have no data either.

I don't think I've said evolutionists 'have no data'

Both evolutionists and creationists 'have' the same data.

It's a matter of how that data is interpreted.

Since nobody was there to observe evolution, it is inferred.

No one has actually seen the 'origin' of a new species of mammal, for instance.

As we've discussed, as soon as the first member of a 'new species' arrived, he'd have no other member of the 'new species' to breed with, so the family line is gonna be short, no?

[scarmig]

Originally Posted by c'est la vie

Now I know you haven't been in many churches if that's all you think a pastor does.

I'm know that talking about the book requires many days of interpretive research in order to come up with something comprehensible to say. Heck these guys spend years and many thousands of dollars being taught how to do this in seminary school. It's a wonder they don't all graduate atheists. (To be honest, I think many of them do, but have transitioned from spiritual leaders to career salesmen).

[Nea1]

Originally Posted by mgt04

Its funny because Christians have no data either. You have a book called a bible that was rewritten over time even by Kings (people who were just in charge). Mostly everything over time that could be remotely considered threatening to the Christian religion was either locked up in the Vatican vault or burned or people even killed (hence the Crusades).

History was written by whoever was in charge and had the most power. So all manuscripts and literature saved from back in the day of course will support Christianity.

I actually believe that there was a person named Jesus Christ who was a person of high importance back in the day but nothing divine about him or coming from a God.

Yes, see this is my thinking. I have heard too that things are kept from us. Why? Why did the Vatican make a huge deal about the Movie (crud forgot the name) with Tom Hanks and others like it? It has been rewritten and rewritten, how does anyone believe it can be accurate? Is it in any other ancient documents? Any other mention of Jesus and the crazy events ( flood, burning bush and such)?