Are you an evolutionist or a creationist and why

[Falconer02]

So why does it matter? Suppose you actually did believe that 'G*d pulls the sun across the sky in his golden chariot' ... so? Does it CHANGE the Truth? 

Why does it matter? Because let's apply the same thought process to natural disasters. I'm sure you can see the difference between these 2 ideas-

"This earthquake happened because gay people are rampant in this area. God is punishing us for allowing them to do what they want. If we get rid of them, these earthquakes will stop."

"This earthquake happened because we're dangerously close to the edge of a tectonic plate. We should probably move away from it, set up some seismic activity scales, and mark it on a map so people know of it and we can avoid more damage and death."

The truth does not matter to religious people. If it did, there would be no religious people.

What evidence have you that it's NOT G*d-pulled?

A 1st grade education.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_orbit

What evidence do you have that this god does pull it? Once we set both sets of evidences on the table, we can rationally determine which is more logical.

What's the difference between ancient mythology & the modern mythology we have today (a.k.a. "science," but really 'scientist's highly-convincing stories')?

There's a humongous difference between mythological beliefs and the scientific process. It is true that they would overlap each other in ancient times, but that's simply because of technological limitations and religious dogma of the time. The scientific process in modern times and marvelous- the fact that you can see this message is proof of that. Science has the ability to improve itself- if it's wrong, that's a good thing! That means we can improve our view with any new evidences we find.

Mythology- specifically creationism as an example, does not have that luxury. If one thing is wrong with it, the whole foundation crumbles and there's nothing to build upon since it relies so much on the ancient beliefs. This is why creationists are so crazy with rigging and tacking-on their beliefs onto legit sciences- if they're wrong, their entire beliefs are proven to be faulty. Thus is why you hear "the bible actually meant this when it says this." It's a cheap and convenient way to make something seem legit, but the reality is it's a delusional and fallacious way of thinking.

[Falconer02]

God created the Earth 6,000 years ago.

A-HYUK HYUK!

[hitch0403]

Man has created natural disasters with his pollution of the earth.

And less we forget what God told Adam after they rebelled.."Cursed is the ground on your account"

[hitch0403]

God pulling the sun with a cart....LOL!!!

Lets just say Jehovah is a much better mathematician then we could ever imagine!!

[hitch0403]

The word of God says that "God trys NO ONE with evil."

It also says,"God is NOT to be mocked,for whatever a man sows this he will reap"

The evidence is as abundant as is the ignorance of the world!

[Falconer02]

Man has created natural disasters with his pollution of the earth.

Natural 'disasters' have been happening since the formation of our planet. Some in the far past are exponentially worse than what we deal with now. Though it is possible that we're potentially giving a way for natural disasters to occur, I would not go so far as to say we are the primary cause for them (well...desertification can easily be caused by us, but it occurs naturally too). They're going to happen with or without our acts.

God pulling the sun with a cart....LOL!!! Lets just say Jehovah is a much better mathematician then we could ever imagine!!

That's an actual ancient belief. Just like yours! So the irony in this quote is very apparent.

The word of God says that "God trys NO ONE with evil."

Except for originally creating antagonists, condoning evil behavior, killing off nearly the entire planet, and promising to do it again in the future.

The evidence is as abundant as is the ignorance of the world!

Another ironic statement as it could be applied to the disbelief in gods.

[reiddb]

A creationist....absolutely!  Listen to youtubes of Kent Hovind and Ken Ham.  Circular reasoning MANY "proofs" that have been proven false continue to circulate.  If you want the truth....you can find it.

[Falconer02]

A creationist....absolutely!  Listen to youtubes of Kent Hovind and Ken Ham.  Circular reasoning MANY "proofs" that have been proven false continue to circulate.  If you want the truth....you can find it.

You mean the well-known liars and convicted frauds? Yeah, let's take points from them. How Christian.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ken_Ham

[mythociate]

The word of God says that "God trys NO ONE with evil."...

Oh really? Who made Pharoah harden his heart against Hebrew Exodus?

Why does it matter? Because let's apply the same thought process to natural disasters. I'm sure you can see the difference between these 2 ideas-

"This earthquake happened because gay people are rampant in this area. God is punishing us for allowing them to do what they want. If we get rid of them, these earthquakes will stop."

"This earthquake happened because we're dangerously close to the edge of a tectonic plate. We should probably move away from it, set up some seismic activity scales, and mark it on a map so people know of it and we can avoid more damage and death."

The truth does not matter to religious people. If it did, there would be no religious people.

What if it's NOT tectonic-plates? What if it's because our arm of the Milky Way Galaxy is swinging us through a wormhole for the next billion years?

What evidence have you that it's NOT G*d-pulled?

A 1st grade education.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_orbit

What evidence do you have that this god does pull it? Once we set both sets of evidences on the table, we can rationally determine which is more logical.

If you 'prove' that God does something, you 'prove' He exists; as faith necessitates a LACK of proof, and as God only exists because of faith, it is at that point that God "vanishes in a puff of logic."

What's the difference between ancient mythology & the modern mythology we have today (a.k.a. "science," but really 'scientist's highly-convincing stories')?

There's a humongous difference between mythological beliefs and the scientific process. It is true that they would overlap each other in ancient times, but that's simply because of technological limitations and religious dogma of the time. The scientific process in modern times and marvelous- the fact that you can see this message is proof of that. Science has the ability to improve itself- if it's wrong, that's a good thing! That means we can improve our view with any new evidences we find.

Mythology- specifically creationism as an example, does not have that luxury. If one thing is wrong with it, the whole foundation crumbles and there's nothing to build upon since it relies so much on the ancient beliefs. This is why creationists are so crazy with rigging and tacking-on their beliefs onto legit sciences- if they're wrong, their entire beliefs are proven to be faulty. Thus is why you hear "the bible actually meant this when it says this." It's a cheap and convenient way to make something seem legit, but the reality is it's a delusional and fallacious way of thinking.

Let me make my question clearer: what's the difference between 'I read that somebody saw something amazing' & 'I read that somebody tested-&-measured something amazing'? You're still left with 'I read ... he said/she said' (except with the 'measured' one you can theoretically "test it yourself")>

[hitch0403]

God had nothing to do with Pharoah being a creep.He saw in his heart thats the person he was.He gave him every chance to change and let Israel go and prove he is long suffering for a reason.He also told him,I have kept you in existence for the very reason to show the world "I am the TRUE GOD!!!"Which he proved when Egypt still challenged HIM coming after his people and drowning them in the sea.

He allowed Abraham to find 50 righteous people in Sodom before HE destroyed it and Abraham got it down to 10.

There are many instances in the Bible that shows Jehovah is a very forgiving God.Jesus forgave the evildoer on the stake next to him when the evildoer asked to be remembered.Jesus told him,You will be with me in paradise.Obviously Jesus saw his heart was asking for mercy.

The difference between us being a judge and the CREATOR is that HE knows our hearts better than even ourselves.

Many even say God knew A&E would sin.Well if HE knew why did he bother warning them of penalty.Being an all knowing God doesnt mean HE has to know ALL THE time.He can choose that also.If he couldnt then that would mean he had no control over that.

Bible discernment lets you understand all this.If your heart isnt right towards it its like that double edge sword.Draws out the other intentions of the heart and dont wanna be accountable.

[vp44]

Wow there is people out there you should stay away from.

[Falconer02]

What if it's NOT tectonic-plates? What if it's because our arm of the Milky Way Galaxy is swinging us through a wormhole for the next billion years?

Well can you provide your evidence of this? Because if you can't, we'll have to shelf this idea until we discover actual proof. That's the point of science/methodological naturalism. I mean the idea of the god and his chariot has been sitting on the shelf for centuries now...it's only practical to believe it's fake. It may not be, but do you want to put any money on it being true?

If you 'prove' that God does something, you 'prove' He exists; as faith necessitates a LACK of proof, and as God only exists because of faith, it is at that point that God "vanishes in a puff of logic."

Correct!

Let me make my question clearer: what's the difference between 'I read that somebody saw something amazing' & 'I read that somebody tested-&-measured something amazing'? You're still left with 'I read ... he said/she said' (except with the 'measured' one you can theoretically "test it yourself")>

The difference is this-

A.) Reading a quick article on wikipedia.
B.) Testing a new hypothesis with scientific scrutiny from hundreds (if not thousands) of different scientists who are trying to prove this hypothesis wrong over the course of decades before the evidence is confirmed and taken as a legit scientific theory.

[mythociate]

What if it's NOT tectonic-plates? What if it's because our arm of the Milky Way Galaxy is swinging us through a wormhole for the next billion years?

Well can you provide your evidence of this? Because if you can't, we'll have to shelf this idea until we discover actual proof. That's the point of science/methodological naturalism. I mean the idea of the god and his chariot has been sitting on the shelf for centuries now...it's only practical to believe it's fake. It may not be, but do you want to put any money on it being true?

Why bother with dis-proof? If believing lets you sleep a little more-comfortably, what's the harm? (Maybe I ought to answer that one too, as I spend a lot of time arguing AGAINST "wrong" dogma: the man who believes something 'wrong' is like the one who built his house on the ancient swamp-ground. Maybe his house'll stay up while he's awake, but we all must sleep. And maybe he has enough friends-&-family to keep it up while he is sleeping, but ... better to trust a firm foundation than the shifty force of men's flesh.)

Let me make my question clearer: what's the difference between 'I read that somebody saw something amazing' & 'I read that somebody tested-&-measured something amazing'? You're still left with 'I read ... he said/she said' (except with the 'measured' one you can theoretically "test it yourself")>

The difference is this-

A.) Reading a quick article on wikipedia.
B.) Testing a new hypothesis with scientific scrutiny from hundreds (if not thousands) of different scientists who are trying to prove this hypothesis wrong over the course of decades before the evidence is confirmed and taken as a legit scientific theory.

And who's to say that those hundreds (if not thousands) of different scientists were not merely characters in 'the mythology of today' (science-fiction)?

[vp44]

Emperor Constantine has what meaning to the Bible? Just a question to gain knowledge.

[Falconer02]

Why bother with dis-proof?

Because people used to think smearing animal blood on wounds would heal people. Knowing how things work is extremely vital to humanity. This extends to basic biology to vast astronomical studies.

If believing lets you sleep a little more-comfortably, what's the harm?

I could argue that it's delusional, but you'd be right- no harm is coming to the individual. The reality of it is that it's not just individuals who are doing this- there has been bloodshed over these delusions for ages and there still is.

And who's to say that those hundreds (if not thousands) of different scientists were not merely characters in 'the mythology of today' (science-fiction)?

That very well could be! But the evidences we've discovered so far have stuck within our reality for quite some time, so I really don't find a reason to dismiss them as pseudoscience. But going back to the original thought of this thread, would you rather trust scientifically literate people whose job requires them to disprove each other, or would you rather trust an ancient book written by primitive people who were scientifically illiterate and gullible?