The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Originally Posted by SigTerm you should stop avoiding counter-arguments presented by your opponents (if you want discussion or if you want to convince somebody).

Not the case. There are clearly more people posting here against my views than for them; and, like you, I have other business to tend to. It's not possible for me to read and answer all your objections (not to mention, getting to the presentation that I mean to address point by point).

Originally Posted by bluegospel Not the case. There are clearly more people posting here against my views than for them; and, like you, I have other business to tend to. It's not possible for me to read and answer all your objections (not to mention, getting to the presentation that I mean to address point by point).

Yea right..as Smart would say "Old excuse trick"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNYC7UsE5wU
1)You had time to post previous posts but no time to reply on this? Hypocrite much?
2)You don't have to answer everything just something you are answering
3)Noone is against your view but for truth

Originally Posted by floppywhopper This will be covered by the BBC

Hope it's on after Top Gear.

oh better make this religious... Top gear is righteous!

Originally Posted by Arcane Yea right..as Smart would say "Old excuse trick" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNYC7UsE5wU

Okay Arcane. I nominate you to have the prerogative of 3 questions or objections, in consideration of everyone posting here, to be held in a queue, that I should next address. I'm allowed interjections.

Originally Posted by bluegospel Okay Arcane. I nominate you to have the prerogative of 3 questions or objections, in consideration of everyone posting here, to be held in a queue, that I should next address. I'm allowed interjections.

Yes. It is up to you to decide what people on this forum are allowed to say to you and when they are allowed to say it.

I find it hilarious that you believe this.

Originally Posted by bluegospel Okay Arcane. I nominate you to have the prerogative of 3 questions or objections, in consideration of everyone posting here, to be held in a queue, that I should next address. I'm allowed interjections.

Should i cry or laugh now? Sorry i don't get it. Seems like personal aggression towards me while i haven't provoked it. If you want questions or objections from me well..there is page selection to go back in thread to read older posts for reason. You will find plenty questions already posted and not answered. Just before you answer that Bible or other holy book says something please PROOVE that that book is not liar in first place. Science can proove science itself - can holy book proove itself too? Otherwise other books are automatic reality true.

Originally Posted by Arcane Sorry i don't get it. Seems like personal aggression towards me while i haven't provoked it.

I'm not attacking you. You suggested I'm making excuses in order to avoid answering certain objections. If there are objections that you would like answered, I'm offering to answer at your discretion. Otherwise you are admitting as false your charge of evasiveness.

Hope it's on after Top Gear. oh better make this religious... Top gear is righteous!

why do you think the Stig wears white

Originally Posted by bluegospel Not the case. There are clearly more people posting here against my views than for them; and, like you, I have other business to tend to. It's not possible for me to read and answer all your objections (not to mention, getting to the presentation that I mean to address point by point).

It is your fault.
If you're busy, then you shouldn't have posted in the first place. "Proving the christ" and repeatedly starting religious threads in general was your idea, so you got what you asked for. Also, a very small number (less than dozen) of people participate in religious thread, and their combined feedback looks manageable. Being busy does not justify situation when you rip one minor sentence from big post, ignore the rest of the post then lie in wait till somebody posts something "simpler".

Besides, if you wanted to promote your religion, you could have started another blog instead of trying to post on technical forum.

Originally Posted by bluegospel I'm not attacking you. You suggested I'm making excuses in order to avoid answering certain objections. If there are objections that you would like answered, I'm offering to answer at your discretion. Otherwise you are admitting as false your charge of evasiveness.

See? You are doing it again. It is called beeing hypocrite and going in offtopic. You say you have no time to answer but you have time to post reply again and again - double standarts? If someone is busy he|she won't answer at all even post 1 sentence reply but you do. Also your post goes in offtopic - this is not trial with charges and false|true end results and why would i answer my own questions? You offer? Well thanks for offering but i can reject offer + you are not in position to offer - you are not God or chosen one. I really hope if there is God it is fair otherwise this cartoon will be true...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6_9QmM6TfE

Originally Posted by SL00b Evolution doesn't say a thing about a god. But what it does is give us a perfectly valid explanation for the diversity of life that does not require a god.

I was going through wikipedia for evolution of life several complex terms.... Prokaryote, Eukaryote complex cells etc. I hardly got anything mentioned there but I got a clear message that there is no proof of anything whatever it is written there. It is all wild guess of scientists and with that too they have different opinions. They are coming up with ideas what they believe in. More brains more confusion. And its obvious also, how they can be sure of something which they claim to be as old as multi billion years.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli I was going through wikipedia for evolution of life

You should go to the library instead, or ask scientist. Wikipedia is convenient, but is not trustworthy.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli And its obvious also, how they can be sure of something which they claim to be as old as multi billion years.

Because theory was supported by evidence. If new evidence appears, theory will be changed.
Besides, you're wasting your time. Even if you somehow disprove evolution, that will not add any reason to trust Quran.

Originally Posted by SigTerm You should go to the library instead, or ask scientist. Wikipedia is convenient, but is not trustworthy. Because theory was supported by evidence. If new evidence appears, theory will be changed. Besides, you're wasting your time. Even if you somehow disprove evolution, that will not add any reason to trust Quran.

Thanks GOD atleast there is one atheist who accepts this as theory.

There is nothing to disprove... let scientists prove it first.....

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Thanks GOD atleast there is one atheist

I'm agnostic.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli who accepts this as theory.

It already has been said many times that there is a difference between scientific theory and a theory.

Originally Posted by SigTerm It already has been said many times that there is a difference between scientific theory and a theory.

I find it hard to believe that any religious person would ever wilfully misinterpret technical terms for any reason.