Comments on: Evolution….. The LIE!! according to the bible.. Jesus is creator http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm God's word above all things. Wed, 10 Nov 2010 08:33:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Jay Osborne http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-445 Jay Osborne Sun, 13 Jun 2010 22:16:46 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-445 There is an enormous amount of proof that the biblical account of creation is a lie,to even begin to believe this tale one must be biblically mind controlled and have blind faith.You ask for true proof that god does not exist,by the same token you can not prove god does exist.It does not take any special education to know that the AIG claims are false it just takes a little common sense and to not be biblically mind controlled.Although you claim you are not debating the age of the earth it is obvious that it has to be considered when believing the Genesis tale. Creation believers must believe the earth and man are only six to ten thousand years old which is the first and greatest problem for believing in a creation according to Genesis.Even an idiot should know better than to believe in a 6-10 thousand year old earth and man.Then you use John 1:1-5 to claim Jesus was the Word and therefore the creator of the earth,your problem here is history does not even record a Jesus as the N.T.claims,that is the miracle worker Jesus,crucified and resurrected from the dead,history records dozens of people named Jesus(it was a common name)in the first century but no miracle worker or crucified and resurrected Jesus.I can name over 40 historians and philosophers writing and living around Jerusalem in the first century but none know one thing about the N.T.Jesus. Not only that they also(historians)do not know one thing about Herod's slaughter of the Innocents,or all those supposed resurrected from the dead saints walking around in the streets of Jerusalem and no reliable info about the darkening of the sun or the earthquake at the supposed crucifixtion.Even Philo born about 10 B.C.& dying about 45 A.D.who lived all the way through Jesus supposed time and who wrote extensively about the Jewish religion knows not one thing about a Jesus miracle worker,a crucifixtion or resurrection.Seneca lived all the way through Jesus supposed time on earth,he tracked and wrote about earthquakes and sun eclipses,but he knows nothing about an earthquake or sun darkening at Jesus supposed crucifixtion.Christianity has no known birthdate or death date of it's supposed Savior and so you guess at a birthdate from 5 B.C.to 7 A.D.and a death date guess between 30-34 A.D.but yet we know birth and death dates of important people even back B.C.and lots of them in the first century. Don't you think it quite odd that the supposed most important person who ever lived had no birth or death date known?There is far,far more evidence for evolution than there is for the person of Jesus Christ ever living or walking on this earth.This email barely touches on all the false claims your Bible makes.So any thinking person should come nearer believing scientists evolutionary claims than believing the legends, myths,fables and tales in the Bible. Sincerely,without malice, Jay Osborne There is an enormous amount of proof that the biblical account of creation is a lie,to even begin to believe this tale one must be biblically mind controlled and have blind faith.You ask for true proof that god does not exist,by the same token you can not prove god does exist.It does not take any special education to know that the AIG claims are false it just takes a little common sense and to not be biblically mind controlled.Although you claim you are not debating the age of the earth it is obvious that it has to be considered when believing the Genesis tale.
Creation believers must believe the earth and man are only six to ten thousand years old which is the first and greatest problem for believing in a creation according to Genesis.Even an idiot should know better than to believe in a 6-10 thousand year old earth and man.Then you use John 1:1-5 to claim Jesus was the Word and therefore the creator of the earth,your problem here is history does not even record a Jesus as the N.T.claims,that is the miracle worker Jesus,crucified and resurrected from the dead,history records dozens of people named Jesus(it was a common name)in the first century but no miracle worker or crucified and resurrected Jesus.I can name over 40 historians and philosophers writing and living around Jerusalem in the first century but none know one thing about the N.T.Jesus.
Not only that they also(historians)do not know one thing about Herod’s slaughter of the Innocents,or all those supposed resurrected from the dead saints walking around in the streets of Jerusalem and no reliable info about the darkening of the sun or the earthquake at the supposed crucifixtion.Even Philo born about 10 B.C.& dying about 45 A.D.who lived all the way through Jesus supposed time and who wrote extensively about the Jewish religion knows not one thing about a Jesus miracle worker,a crucifixtion or resurrection.Seneca lived all the way through Jesus supposed time on earth,he tracked and wrote about earthquakes and sun eclipses,but he knows nothing about an earthquake or sun darkening at Jesus supposed crucifixtion.Christianity has no known birthdate or death date of it’s supposed Savior and so you guess at a birthdate from 5 B.C.to 7 A.D.and a death date guess between 30-34 A.D.but yet we know birth and death dates of important people even back B.C.and lots of them in the first century.
Don’t you think it quite odd that the supposed most important person who ever lived had no birth or death date known?There is far,far more evidence for evolution than there is for the person of Jesus Christ ever living or walking on this earth.This email barely touches on all the false claims your Bible makes.So any thinking person should come nearer believing scientists evolutionary claims than believing the legends, myths,fables and tales in the Bible.
Sincerely,without malice,
Jay Osborne

]]> By: Riponred http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-210 Riponred Thu, 18 Dec 2008 18:10:13 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-210 Didn't read the article, but love the picture! What a great creation image. I'd like to use it for a background slide for my sermon this Sunday on Mark 1, which begins with the same word as Genesis does (Septuagint version). Didn’t read the article, but love the picture! What a great creation image. I’d like to use it for a background slide for my sermon this Sunday on Mark 1, which begins with the same word as Genesis does (Septuagint version).

]]> By: daren http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-209 daren Thu, 11 Dec 2008 08:50:26 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-209 Who owns the copyright to the above picture? Who owns the copyright to the above picture?

]]> By: Princess http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-188 Princess Sat, 30 Aug 2008 01:04:55 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-188 Does anyone know what the bible say about online dating. Is it wrong or okay? Does anyone know what the bible say about online dating. Is it wrong or okay?

]]> By: Ultra-L0rd http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-183 Ultra-L0rd Fri, 08 Aug 2008 13:09:41 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-183 Hi Vardarac. I have yet to spot any dishonest tactics or logical fallacies (and the fact that I'm studying a degree in philosophy gives me an authoritative view on logical fallacies) You seem to generalize AIG's view point on dating methods. Though I must say, AIG at least give an explanation why they feel these dating methods are wrong. Would you be so kind as to explain to me why they are right? Your comment about paul cautioning his readers. The bible does indeed have different styles of writing. They may write in poetry form, historical form, letter form and even apocalyptic form. But the Bible is also written in such a way that we can easily distinguish between these different writing styles. If you read a book or a chapter. You should most definitely read it in context. If you do this, you will pick out the metaphors very easily. Your claim that "my religion" does not have the basis in logic, highlights your ignorance. The bible has the premise that God is righteous, all powerful and all knowing. I would say that all statements made in the bible are supported by this premise. To disprove any of the conclusions, you would first have to falsify the premise. Which brings me to my conclusion : Can you truly prove to me that God does not exist? Because if you can't, then logically, the bible is true. Hi Vardarac.
I have yet to spot any dishonest tactics or logical fallacies (and the fact that I’m studying a degree in philosophy gives me an authoritative view on logical fallacies)

You seem to generalize AIG’s view point on dating methods. Though I must say, AIG at least give an explanation why they feel these dating methods are wrong. Would you be so kind as to explain to me why they are right?

Your comment about paul cautioning his readers. The bible does indeed have different styles of writing.
They may write in poetry form, historical form, letter form and even apocalyptic form.

But the Bible is also written in such a way that we can easily distinguish between these different writing styles. If you read a book or a chapter. You should most definitely read it in context. If you do this, you will pick out the metaphors very easily.

Your claim that “my religion” does not have the basis in logic, highlights your ignorance. The bible has the premise that God is righteous, all powerful and all knowing.

I would say that all statements made in the bible are supported by this premise. To disprove any of the conclusions, you would first have to falsify the premise.

Which brings me to my conclusion :
Can you truly prove to me that God does not exist?
Because if you can’t, then logically, the bible is true.

]]> By: Vardarac http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-182 Vardarac Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:46:30 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-182 Answers in Genesis is a SHAM. They use dishonest tactics and logical fallacies to advance their theological point of view. For instance, they actually claim that dinosaurs were created alongside humans. Let's pretend that none of the glaring contradictions carbon dating provides exist. Even if this were the case, there is simply no historical record of dinosaurs or dinosaur-like beasts following the period in which there was supposed to be a flood (remember that the Bible claims that Noah took two of every creature on his Ark). Further, they claim that there is great inaccuracy in all dating techniques- this is patently untrue for the vast majority of examples, yet AiG chooses to look only at cases (such as snails, which being sticky creatures are liable to pick up particles of any age as they travel) for which these techniques are inaccurate. The problem with your article is that it is entirely based on scripture. This is very telling. You have transcended a point where you are willing to listen to modern, evidence-supported analysis and take a 2,000 year-old book at face value- and LITERALLY, when Paul himself cautions that many messages in the Bible could easily be metaphors. Your religion does not have a basis in logic and therefore has no basis in claiming that well-supported theories such as evolution are lies. You do yourself a disservice in continuing to limit your thoughts in this way and denigrate the work of countless hard-working scientists with this article. If you cannot understand what others are trying to tell you about the science behind currently-accepted theory, ask someone familiar with it to explain it to you as simply as they can. Free your mind. Don't limit it because of an old dogma. Answers in Genesis is a SHAM. They use dishonest tactics and logical fallacies to advance their theological point of view. For instance, they actually claim that dinosaurs were created alongside humans. Let’s pretend that none of the glaring contradictions carbon dating provides exist. Even if this were the case, there is simply no historical record of dinosaurs or dinosaur-like beasts following the period in which there was supposed to be a flood (remember that the Bible claims that Noah took two of every creature on his Ark). Further, they claim that there is great inaccuracy in all dating techniques- this is patently untrue for the vast majority of examples, yet AiG chooses to look only at cases (such as snails, which being sticky creatures are liable to pick up particles of any age as they travel) for which these techniques are inaccurate.

The problem with your article is that it is entirely based on scripture. This is very telling. You have transcended a point where you are willing to listen to modern, evidence-supported analysis and take a 2,000 year-old book at face value- and LITERALLY, when Paul himself cautions that many messages in the Bible could easily be metaphors. Your religion does not have a basis in logic and therefore has no basis in claiming that well-supported theories such as evolution are lies. You do yourself a disservice in continuing to limit your thoughts in this way and denigrate the work of countless hard-working scientists with this article.

If you cannot understand what others are trying to tell you about the science behind currently-accepted theory, ask someone familiar with it to explain it to you as simply as they can. Free your mind. Don’t limit it because of an old dogma.

]]> By: /Seventy-Two » Evolution….. The LIE!! according to the bible.. Jesus is creator http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-159 /Seventy-Two » Evolution….. The LIE!! according to the bible.. Jesus is creator Tue, 20 May 2008 22:52:48 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-159 [...] The Mumbling Christian This entry was written by oneaustin and posted on May 20, 2008 at 5:52 pm and filed under Photo. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « cartoon: unto the end of the age | nakedpastor [...] [...] The Mumbling Christian This entry was written by oneaustin and posted on May 20, 2008 at 5:52 pm and filed under Photo. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « cartoon: unto the end of the age | nakedpastor [...]

]]> By: Ultra-L0rd http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-158 Ultra-L0rd Mon, 19 May 2008 07:18:55 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-158 Laughsoutloud : You have one problem with your conclusion. Your premise is false. There is no actual scientific proof that Evolution happened - happens. Sure they have many theories, ideas, and assumptions. But no hard factual evidence. If you are so certain about your claim. Go grab $250,000 http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=67&kws=standing%20offer See, the question you should ask yourself is this : Do you want to cast aside the living God and his offer of eternal life, just because of a theory that hasn't been proven yet? Laughsoutloud :
You have one problem with your conclusion.
Your premise is false.
There is no actual scientific proof that Evolution happened – happens. Sure they have many theories, ideas, and assumptions. But no hard factual evidence.

If you are so certain about your claim. Go grab $250,000
http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=67&kws=standing%20offer

See, the question you should ask yourself is this :
Do you want to cast aside the living God and his offer of eternal life, just because of a theory that hasn’t been proven yet?

]]> By: laughsoutloud http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-156 laughsoutloud Sun, 18 May 2008 02:16:02 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-156 Except... that evolution happened - happens... will continue to happen. Do you want to deal with reality, or let your theology become a celebration of ignorance - the appearance of piety, but grounded in a lie? Martin Luther made a similar argument for believing that the sun circled the earth, and for the same reasons... yet Christians have managed to accept the reality that the earth circles the sun with faith intact (you are living prof). You can deal with evolution as well - live in the light. Except… that evolution happened – happens… will continue to happen.

Do you want to deal with reality, or let your theology become a celebration of ignorance – the appearance of piety, but grounded in a lie?

Martin Luther made a similar argument for believing that the sun circled the earth, and for the same reasons… yet Christians have managed to accept the reality that the earth circles the sun with faith intact (you are living prof). You can deal with evolution as well – live in the light.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm/comment-page-1#comment-155 Anonymous Sat, 17 May 2008 23:24:30 +0000 http://www.mumblingchristian.com/article/evolution-the-lie.htm#comment-155 Good idea, but you forget one thing. God had a plan in the beginning, so he knew that it was going to happen. And he planned ahead, making sure that since we did sin, we would at least be able to survive the climate changes that He knew was going to happen. Good idea, but you forget one thing. God had a plan in the beginning, so he knew that it was going to happen. And he planned ahead, making sure that since we did sin, we would at least be able to survive the climate changes that He knew was going to happen.

]]>