Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-11-2015, 02:25 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Since that time, sin has been passed down through all the generations of mankind and we, Adam’s descendants, have inherited sin from him.
This is an assertion that makes no logical sense.
If a man murders someone else, do we then lock up his sons for this inherited crime?

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Romans 5:12 tells us that through Adam sin entered the world, and so death was passed on to all men because “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23).
Another assertion that makes no logical sense.
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Through Adam, the inherent inclination to sin entered the human race, and human beings became sinners by nature.

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  We are sinners not because we sin; rather, we sin because we are sinners.

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  All humans, from Adam to Moses, were subject to death, not because of their sinful acts against the Mosaic Law (which they did not have), but because of their own inherited sinful nature.
Was Jesus human?
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Imputing our sin to Jesus, God treated Him as if He were a sinner, though He was not
Logically we could conclude that Jesus was not human.

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  It is important to understand that sin was imputed to Him, but He did not inherit it from Adam. He bore the penalty for sin, but He never became a sinner.
This is an assertion. It implies that Jesus was not human. His "sacrifice" would be no more special than the "sacrifice" of a non human animal.

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  In exchange, God imputed the righteousness of Christ to believers and credited our accounts with His righteousness, just as He had credited our sins to Christ’s account (2 Corinthians 5:21).
If the god had the power to forgive then the god was the one who put in place the requirement of death for sin. The god did not need death and gains no value from it. The god could have chosen to forgive without receiving a useless blood sacrifice.
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  A third type of sin is personal sin, that which is committed every day by every human being.
Again highlighting that Jesus was not human.
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Because we have inherited a sin nature from Adam, we commit individual, personal sins, everything from seemingly innocent untruths to murder. Those who have not placed their faith in Jesus Christ must pay the penalty for these personal sins
But people who are not Christians do not believe this guff. This argument is circular.
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  but now we also have the power to resist sinning.
Although it is the atheists that are underrepresented in American prisons. How do we explain that?
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  The only just penalty for this sin is death (Romans 6:23), not just physical death but eternal death (Revelation 20:11-15).
An assertion. Who decides what the penalty is? If god decides then the god can decide that death is not required as a penalty.

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Throughout old testament scripture sacrifices were performed for several reasons. Some sacrifices were made to give thanks to God (ex. If a shepherd was blessed with a large flock he would pick the finest lamb from the flock to perform a "burnt offering". This was basically a way of saying "Thank you God for the blessings you provided. In return I will sacrifice a portion of it so you may be glorified."
This is the thinking of sick and twisted people. What gives you the impression that the god thinks a blood sacrifice is of value? Is the god sick and twisted too?
BTW this wasn't particular to Christianity, many other religiouns did blood sacrifices too.
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  It says "God, I don't need you or your laws. I am going to do my own thing without you". In order to restore this relationship with God a "sin offering" of an animal was necessary.
An assertion. Where is the logic in how god gets value from the unnecessry killing of a non human animal?
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  None of them were human sacrifices. Old testament scripture condemned human sacrifices in Deuteronomy calling it an evil practice.
An yet the god gave Jesus as a "human" sacrifice? Did the god do(support/accept) an evil practice?

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Why was a sacrifice required? What is the significance of blood? Leviticus 17 says that ..."The life of the creature is in the blood". Animals do not have the capacity to sin so their lives are pure. Humans are sinners so their blood is not pure. Which is another reason why a human sacrifice is not acceptable to god. So when an animal is sacrificed as a "sin offering" the pure life of the animal is used as atonement for the sin that was committed.
More assertions that make no logical sense.

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Because the bible teaches that Jesus was the embodiment of God and was free of sin. He was the only one who was worthy of a human sacrifice because he was without sin so his blood was pure.
So was he human or not? Seems we have come stuck against the law of non contradiction.

(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  But there is a catch. The only thing that is required to be saved is to accept Jesus. To believe that he died for your sins. It is like he is giving away free tickets to heaven but all you have to do to get one is to believe in him and love him.

How can an atheist consider themselves to be a sinner if sin is described as the below?
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Sin is described in the Bible as transgression of the law of God (1 John 3:4) and rebellion against God (Deuteronomy 9:7; Joshua 1:18).
There is no god, so the atheist has no sin. Why would we then consider that we need to make a payment for our sins?
This logic is circular.
Only a Christian would consider that they have sin, only a Christian would consider that Jesus death is payment for their sin. They are already Christians so they already believe and accept/love Jesus. They are not now making a choice to accept Jesus in order to get their free ticket.
Do you see the circular issue here?

It seems the religious folk invent (assert) an unobservable problem and then cunningly sell a cure.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stevil's post
13-11-2015, 02:44 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(08-08-2011 12:38 PM)Filox Wrote:  I never met anyone who doesn't believe in evolution. Not in RL. But that is because I live in 90% Roman-Catholic country, and Roman-Catholics do believe in evolution, science, astronomy, geography... Actually, here on my island we have some very old monasteries that were astronomical stations with old telescopes, now they are turned into museums. It was just a couple of years ago that I first heard of Creationists in USA and I was amazed and terrified at the same time when I heard they are for real. I mean, I still can not comprehend all that BS they are preaching and when I think that George Bush Jr. is one of them and he ruled the most powerful nation in the world for 8 years, it becomes really terrifying. I don't know what will I do if I ever meet anyone in RL, I am afraid I beat him senseless... Just kidding, of course, but their ideas do get me very mad and angry.
.

Even living here in the US it's hard to comprehend that BS. And especially here in central Florida.

DJ

Live Better...Help Often....Wonder More
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-11-2015, 02:57 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
I have not forgotten about you all. Just finishing up some work. It will have to be later tonight before I can reply.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-11-2015, 02:57 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(13-11-2015 01:40 PM)Stevil Wrote:  This is a fundamental issue, if a theist chaplain is offering support to an atheist there is a high likelihood of misalignment and confusion. The theist maybe trying his hardest to be impartial, to be aligned with the atheist but may fundamentally miss the mark without knowing it.

I think the number one way a theist chaplain can support an atheist is to lend a friendly ear and not judge - i.e. leave religion out completely, and do one's best to function as a secular counsellor would. There are plenty of theists that I would and *do* go to for advice, because I respect their *life* experience, not their woo-woo experience. They are well aware that I don't want God answers so they don't bother with them.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
13-11-2015, 02:58 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(13-11-2015 01:40 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(13-11-2015 11:07 AM)unfogged Wrote:  He's asking what evidence you have to support those beliefs.
It's about putting 2 and 2 together in order to get the complete picture.
Sure there are the assertions:
- Jesus died for our sins.


Then there is the second level of assertions.
- We are all sinners.
- Jesus was free from sin
- We should have paid the price on our own sins with our own deaths, but Jesus paid it, so we get eternal life
- Jesus death on the cross was a sacrifice

But if you look at the stories they don't line up with the assertions.
- If humans are all sinners (born with the stain of sin) then how come Jesus is without sin?
- Why is death payment for sin? Who is the payment made to? How does this entity get value from our death? and why do we owe payment to this entity?
- How can we see the Roman's crucifying Jesus as being a sacrifice? When I watch Vikings tv show, they have a sacrifice table, they have a holy person with a blade, they perform a ritual and say some magic words. It seems like they are making a special sacrifice to a specific god. But with the Christian story there is non of that. The Romans don't even believe in the Jewish god. So they can't be performing a special sacrificial ritual.


Christianity, it seems to me is assertion based. Their assertions don't even line up with the stories in the bible which they use to somehow present their assertions.


BTW: From what I posted it was simple for unfogged to get it. But much more difficult for a theist to understand. This is a fundamental issue, if a theist chaplain is offering support to an atheist there is a high likelihood of misalignment and confusion. The theist maybe trying his hardest to be impartial, to be aligned with the atheist but may fundamentally miss the mark without knowing it.

If a "sin nature" is a thing, this mitigates any concept of choice, it also reveals this god concept as fundamentally evil. He created us without any capacity for being sinless and then demands a ridiculously unjust punishment for us doing exactly what we were created to do.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like TheInquisition's post
13-11-2015, 03:06 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(13-11-2015 02:58 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  If a "sin nature" is a thing, this mitigates any concept of choice, it also reveals this god concept as fundamentally evil. He created us without any capacity for being sinless and then demands a ridiculously unjust punishment for us doing exactly what we were created to do.

Nonono it's perfectly fine. God is the one who define's what's good, see? Little things like tribal genocides are fine because God said it was OK. We might not see the big picture but He does. You can't say that it's unjust when the concept of justice derives from God. Rolleyes We are just his little robot toys, how can a robot toy say what is just or unjust according to its maker?

Although the maker does claim to *love* us in his own weird, twisted and sadistic way Unsure

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
13-11-2015, 03:10 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(13-11-2015 11:45 AM)jason_delisle Wrote:  Sin is described in the Bible as transgression of the law of God (1 John 3:4) and rebellion against God (Deuteronomy 9:7; Joshua 1:18). Sin had its beginning with Lucifer, probably the most beautiful and powerful of the angels. Not content with his position, he desired to be higher than God, and that was his downfall, the beginning of sin (Isaiah 14:12-15). Renamed Satan, he brought sin to the human race in the Garden of Eden, where he tempted Adam and Eve with the same enticement, “you shall be like God.” Genesis 3 describes Adam and Eve’s rebellion against God and against His command. Since that time, sin has been passed down through all the generations of mankind and we, Adam’s descendants, have inherited sin from him. Romans 5:12 tells us that through Adam sin entered the world, and so death was passed on to all men because “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23).

Through Adam, the inherent inclination to sin entered the human race, and human beings became sinners by nature. When Adam sinned, his inner nature was transformed by his sin of rebellion, bringing to him spiritual death and depravity which would be passed on to all who came after him. We are sinners not because we sin; rather, we sin because we are sinners. This passed-on depravity is known as inherited sin. Just as we inherit physical characteristics from our parents, we inherit our sinful natures from Adam. King David lamented this condition of fallen human nature in Psalm 51:5: “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”

Your explanation of sin requires a literal Adam if I'm not mistaken. How do you reconcile this with "theistic evolution". Was Adam's mother an ape? Did God inexplicably rip a rib outta Adam to make Eve? How come women have the same number of ribs as men then?

Find the answers to all these questions and more on the next episode of What the Fuck am I Reading?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
13-11-2015, 03:53 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(13-11-2015 03:06 PM)morondog Wrote:  Nonono it's perfectly fine. God is the one who define's what's good, see?
...and Jesus was able to live a life without sinning because of course Jesus is god and anything god does, by definition isn't against god so it is not a sin.
Jesus can go around killing, raping and what-ever the hell he wants to do, but none of it counts as sin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-11-2015, 03:55 PM
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
(13-11-2015 03:10 PM)morondog Wrote:  Your explanation of sin requires a literal Adam if I'm not mistaken. How do you reconcile this with "theistic evolution". Was Adam's mother an ape? Did God inexplicably rip a rib outta Adam to make Eve? How come women have the same number of ribs as men then?

Find the answers to all these questions and more on the next episode of What the Fuck am I Reading?
there's also the death issue. Animals were living and dying for millions of years before homo sapiens evolved. Then we assert that the first homo sapien can't die but then because he ate a piece of fruit, he now has introduced death into the human race and hence he can die. Then low and behold 930 years later he dies.

It's laughable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stevil's post
13-11-2015, 07:07 PM (This post was last modified: 13-11-2015 08:42 PM by jason_delisle.)
RE: Why is it that creationist are trying to disprove evolution
Ok I am back for a moment in order to give you my answer to the dozens of counter arguments. I cannot emphasize enough that I am not trying dodge the questions or be like all the others theist that evaded what they could not explain. Absolutely all the counter arguments that have been mentioned I have seen or thought about myself. Remember, after my wife was murdered I had a very good reason to question the existence of God, especially the God of the bible. Now I know that many are going to be furious but I cannot in good conscience try to provide evidence to support my beliefs. Not because I don't have any but because I know the path that we will inevitably go.

I tell you what I believe simply because I was asked. You ask for evidence to support that belief and I provide. You provide counter evidence to discredit my evidence then I give evidence to counter the counter evidence. Then people who are not following the whole thread jumps in and makes the same counter arguments that were previously covered thus forcing me to repeat myself. Until inevitably it comes down to the proof of the existence of God. Not just the God of the bible but any god which is where the progression of the argument stops. It stops because I cannot prove a god exist and nobody can prove that a god does not exist.

To have theist vs atheist debate is futile for me because the best you can ever hope to achieve is prove the God of the bible does not exist which will result in me turning to Deism.

I know this is not the answer you are looking for and I apologize if anyone is upset. So let's cut to the chase. If you want to have a debate on religion first everyone answer one question. What will it take to prove to you that God exists? I will tell you that the only way to prove to me that God does not exist is by somehow using a time machine to take me back to the origins of the universe to witness it's creation first hand. Or to take me back to the first century to actually witness first hand who Jesus really was (if he existed at all).

This is why I make no attempt to convert you. Because I am sure that whatever proof that you require for the existence of God is almost as impossible to provide as my unlikely request.

Thank you for your insight. I very much enjoy the discussions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like jason_delisle's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: