Evolution vs Creationism---Is there a God? Or is it all just random chance?

[USFREEDOM911]

Jesus doesn't talk about himself in the 3rd person. The parable was written by the disciples.

Which has nothing to do with your acknowledgment and admission that Jesus was talking to his disciples and that you lied in your earlier post.

 

[Casual Leftist]

if you think the "Religious Right" says to represent both billionaires and God, you're not qualified to be talking about anything......

Do you know who Ronald Reagan is? The man was owned by what you would call the 'Deep State' and beloved by Evangelicals. Bush jr, noted war monger and Evangelical. Both men sought to cut taxes to the rich.

Now you may be parsing hairs by what it means to worship the actual God - your interpretation at least being the narrow Truth - but the religious sects of the US can be very politically active. And they have way more influence than you while selling the same stuff as you. The Mormon church is a great example of local and national control.

meanwhile my opinions are more valid and true.......but its not because of divine interpretation......its because your opinions are suck ass stupid........

You literally said God speaks to you through your reading of the Bible. That sounds like you have a pretty confident interpretation of divine matters. And 'I'm right because you're wrong' is a logical fallacy. We may not both be right, but we can both be wrong.

 

[Casual Leftist]

Which has nothing to do with your acknowledgment and admission that Jesus was talking to his disciples and that you lied in your earlier post.

That would require reading it as Jesus talking to his disciples in the 3rd person. But while you fixate on a possible mistake you drop everything else - namely the words that were said to the rich man - a message not just for those 12 to observe.

 

[Casual Leftist]

My, how things have changed, haven't they? Now American Xtians (many of them, not all) say "I got mine so screw the poor." Oddly, they say this at the same time they insist that it's not the government (i.e., the ppl) place to provide a social welfare safety network -- let the poor rely on charity.

It's the scourge of Prosperity Gospel. And the Church being the only other large organization to offer charity it makes the poor population more susceptible to their religious indoctrination.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

And 'I'm right because you're wrong' is a logical fallacy. We may not both be right, but we can both be wrong.

????.....I'm not right BECAUSE you are wrong.....I'm simply right and you are simply wrong .....and I'm obviously a lot smarter than you are........

now yes.....I know who Reagan was.....I voted for him twice........first Republican I ever voted for......given the essence of stupidity that was called Jimmy Carter there was no choice....my mother loved Carter.....till she died she said he was the best president we ever had.........because he taught Sunday School and sold grain to the Russians (I grew up on a grain farm in Iowa).......so don't tell me what religious people "owned".......

as for your hatred of religions, again........your problem, about which I do not give a fuck......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

It's the scourge of Prosperity Gospel. And the Church being the only other large organization to offer charity it makes the poor population more susceptible to their religious indoctrination.

so you're saying government needs to compete with religion in 'indoctrinating' the poor?.......does that mean Obama phones were your alternative to prayer?......

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

It's the scourge of Prosperity Gospel. And the Church being the only other large organization to offer charity it makes the poor population more susceptible to their religious indoctrination.

Absolutely. We have a family member who, for a brief time, lived in a HUD-managed apartment complex. The nearby evangelical church occasionally had offerings of used clothing and canned food for the complex's residents, which of course came with invitations to attend the church. That was okay; obviously no one was forced to go there to get free stuff. But they also canvassed the complex weekly with some of their more zealous parishioners, some of whom would not take no for an answer. They especially liked it when a child answered the door, as you might imagine... their firewalls aren't as strong as adults'.

You're right about that "Prosperity Gospel." They have forgotten the words of their own gods, in exchange for material wealth.

"But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?" -- Jesus, 1 John 3:17

"“If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be. Take care lest there be an unworthy thought in your heart and you say, ‘The seventh year, the year of release is near,’ and your eye look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the Lord against you, and you be guilty of sin. You shall give to him freely, and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him, because for this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake. For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’" -- God, Deut. 15: 7-11

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

It's literally a direct quote, you adding context does not negate the original meaning.
Uh huh, and where do massive tax cuts for the rich and cutting social welfare programs for the poor fit in with this? If Jesus came back today who among the rich would he say "yea you did enough, keep your exorbitant riches"? This passage wasn't the only time Jesus talked about earthly nature of wealth and how one shouldn't gripe about paying taxes.

Here is the context that gfm is so concerned about.

"Luke 12:22-22 And he said to his disciples, “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat, nor about your body, what you will put on. 23 For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. 24 Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds! 25 And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life?[c] 26 If then you are not able to do as small a thing as that, why are you anxious about the rest? 27 Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin,[d] yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 28 But if God so clothes the grass, which is alive in the field today, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith! 29 And do not seek what you are to eat and what you are to drink, nor be worried. 30 For all the nations of the world seek after these things, and your Father knows that you need them. 31 Instead, seek his[e] kingdom, and these things will be added to you.

32 “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. 33 Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. 34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."

Clearly Christ is telling His followers not to be concerned about wealth and material goods; the Lord will provide. Instead they are admonished to focus on Heavenly rewards.

It seems like today's Xtian conservatives want both.

 

[Iolo/Penderyn]

It seems like today's Xtian conservatives want both.

Well, in the New Testament the outlook for the rich is hardly good, is it? Still, with God all things are possible!

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Well, in the New Testament the outlook for the rich is hardly good, is it? Still, with God all things are possible!

We humans seem to have an unfailing capacity to take something good (Jesus' original message) and twist and weaponize it, don't we? American Xtian "conservatives" are no exception. Disclaimer: I have no knowledge of how Xtians behave in other countries so qualified the prior statement by adding "American" to it. Are yours over there as selfish and hate-filled as many of ours are?

 

[Iolo/Penderyn]

We humans seem to have an unfailing capacity to take something good (Jesus' original message) and twist and weaponize it, don't we? American Xtian "conservatives" are no exception. Disclaimer: I have no knowledge of how Xtians behave in other countries so qualified the prior statement by adding "American" to it. Are yours over there as selfish and hate-filled as many of ours are?

No, fair play, mostly just baffled, outnumbered and ignored, except for the West-Indians-as-were, who seem a little short on theology. It's what yours need, I think - power doesn't suit Christians.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

No, fair play, mostly just baffled, outnumbered and ignored, except for the West-Indians-as-were, who seem a little short on theology. It's what yours need, I think - power doesn't suit Christians.

No, it doesn't. It's ironic that, while trying to save other ppl's souls and remake America into a Christian theocracy, they've been seduced by wealth and power and lost their own.

 

[Casual Leftist]

????.....I'm not right BECAUSE you are wrong.....I'm simply right and you are simply wrong .....and I'm obviously a lot smarter than you are........

I know you have difficulty with direct quotes but you said: "meanwhile my opinions are more valid and true......its because your opinions are suck ass stupid........"

So because I'm a fair minded person that likes to deal in good faith conversations I'll accept that that's probably not what you wanted to say - but you did say it.

now yes.....I know who Reagan was.....I voted for him twice........first Republican I ever voted for......given the essence of stupidity that was called Jimmy Carter there was no choice....my mother loved Carter.....till she died she said he was the best president we ever had.........because he taught Sunday School and sold grain to the Russians (I grew up on a grain farm in Iowa).......so don't tell me what religious people "owned".......

as for your hatred of religions, again........your problem, about which I do not give a fuck......

So you confuse distaste for fake Christians with a hatred for religion. I'm not surprised. And you've failed to prove your point that the religious right isn't in bed with the rich. Why do think Pence is the VP?

so you're saying government needs to compete with religion in 'indoctrinating' the poor?.......does that mean Obama phones were your alternative to prayer?

Secularism doesn't push an ideological agenda, not that you would understand what that means. As for the Obama phones, like any religion those who disagree with it must contort the truth with lies for fear of losing power. You may think the Obama phone is an alternative to prayer, but it's far from Obama's hymn:

So, the subsidization of phones began under President Clinton, and has continued under Presidents Bush and Obama.

Over that time, the usage of cell phones rose and the costs came down. Assuming one believes in the Lifeline program in the first place, and remembering that the FCC has mandated the program, it only makes sense to expand the phone assistance program to include cell phones. So, in 2008 the first application of this program for mobile phones began when a company called Tracfone started their Safelink Wireless service in Tennessee.

Aha, some say, that’s the same year Obama was elected! Well, that’s true. But the service in Tennessee was launched three months prior to Obama being elected. And that means the discussion and approval of the extension of the program occurred under President Bush’s watch.

The Bush Phone, anyone? https://www.freegovernmentcellphones.net/faq/obama-phone

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I know you have difficulty with direct quotes but you said: "meanwhile my opinions are more valid and true......its because your opinions are suck ass stupid........"

smartest thing I've seen in this thread today......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

And you've failed to prove your point that the religious right isn't in bed with the rich.

I don't need to disprove demmycunt memes.........they fail on the weight of their own stupidity.....

Secularism doesn't push an ideological agenda

really?......so killing unborn children isn't a constitutional right that needs to be protected?........new definitions of marriage don't have to be imposed on the public when even the majority of Californifucks vote against it?.......the world isn't going to drown if the government doesn't require you to stop driving cars?......

 

[gfm7175]

It's literally a direct quote, you adding context does not negate the original meaning.

I didn't add the context. The context was already there. I'm simply informing you of it, since you seem to be completely unaware of it.

Even direct quotes can be completely misconstrued into any misconstruction that a person desires, so long as context is ignored. If you don't believe me, then take a gander at any political advertisement.

Uh huh, and where do massive tax cuts for the rich and cutting social welfare programs for the poor fit in with this?

Where does thieving wealth from the rich fit into this?

If Jesus came back today who among the rich would he say "yea you did enough, keep your exorbitant riches"?

I suggest actually reading through the Bible and comprehending it. Jesus was perfectly fine with people being rich. What he wasn't okay with was people putting that wealth above God.

This passage wasn't the only time Jesus talked about earthly nature of wealth

Correct.

and how one shouldn't gripe about paying taxes.

Again, the Bible says no such thing.

It says that we should pay our taxes (and pay them honestly), but it does not say that we must agree with governmental tax policy.

 

[Casual Leftist]

I didn't add the context. The context was already there. I'm simply informing you of it, since you seem to be completely unaware of it.

See posts 267 & 268

Even direct quotes can be completely misconstrued into any misconstruction that a person desires, so long as context is ignored. If you don't believe me, then take a gander at any political advertisement.

Ok, but that doesn't seem to apply here.

Where does thieving wealth from the rich fit into this?

Taxation isn't theft. And if it meant helping the poor what do you think Jesus would say?

suggest actually reading through the Bible and comprehending it. Jesus was perfectly fine with people being rich. What he wasn't okay with was people putting that wealth above God.

See posts 267 & 268

Again, the Bible says no such thing.

It says that we should pay our taxes (and pay them honestly), but it does not say that we must agree with governmental tax policy.

And I never said they couldn't complain - so long as the taxes are levied (by the Constitutional powers unto Congress) they should pay them though. Even if they are high, to help the poor.

 

[gfm7175]

Here is the context that gfm is so concerned about.

"Luke 12:22-22 And he said to his disciples, “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat, nor about your body, what you will put on. 23 For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. 24 Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds! 25 And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life?[c] 26 If then you are not able to do as small a thing as that, why are you anxious about the rest? 27 Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin,[d] yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 28 But if God so clothes the grass, which is alive in the field today, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith! 29 And do not seek what you are to eat and what you are to drink, nor be worried. 30 For all the nations of the world seek after these things, and your Father knows that you need them. 31 Instead, seek his[e] kingdom, and these things will be added to you.

32 “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. 33 Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. 34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."

The discussion was actually about Luke 18, not Luke 12. I can gladly address Luke 12 as well, though.

Clearly Christ is telling His followers not to be concerned about wealth and material goods; the Lord will provide. Instead they are admonished to focus on Heavenly rewards.

In a basic sense, yes.

It seems like today's Xtian conservatives want both.

There's nothing wrong with wanting both.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

So you confuse distaste for fake Christians with a hatred for religion. I'm not surprised. And you've failed to prove your point that the religious right isn't in bed with the rich. Why do think Pence is the VP?

He's not alone. RB60 has been telling everyone for literally years that I hate religion and in particular Christians. These idolators truly believe that -- because their masters said so.

 

[Jarod]

I'm definitely a creationist at heart. I believe that God is real, Jesus is the son of God. Humans are chained to a lie because that is the desire of our enemy. Satan has made his kingdom here on earth and has great influence over the human race. As evidenced in the garden of Eden, he caused the fall of humanity, the turn away from God and this is how "death" entered into our vocabulary.​

In reference to evolution, its still just a theory. For one there are no transition forms in the fossil record. For another 99% of all mutations are bad. Evolution is a mathematical impossibility when you sit down and look at the odds.​

​

For example, if evolution were true, what is the deal with all the fraudulent fossils? Surely there would be no need to "fake" the missing links between species, yet this seems to be a re-occurring theme that evolutionists cannot escape from.​

​

​

Please share you views on this, I am eager to gain in insight and knowledge and that is exactly what this thread is about. I don't want this to turn into a political pissing match. Let's not mock or demean, simply list your argument and your evidence and debate your points as you see fit.

Good luck and God speed!​

​

Is it possible that there is a God who created evolution? I believe it is.

In fact its possible there is a God to whom humanity is not the center of the universe.