Conquer Club

I'm glad this thread doesn't have half a page long posts anymore. The saddest part is, I was here when this thread started.

This thread should die, again.

jay_a2j wrote:You have a problem believing in things you can not see.

I certainly don’t believe in legends & fairy tales, that’s true...and it absolutely boggles my mind that there are (presumably) rationally minded adults that do.

jay_a2j wrote:

mr. incrediball wrote: 2: true, you can't see radiation or the wind, but you can see the affect they have on things you can see, as opposed to witches, angels and demons.

I can see the effect that they have on things.

now this is where it starts to get stupid, isn't it just humans that cause suffering? not demons and witches? and what effect do angels have on life?

oh so thoughtful i can not believe the bollocks you have just come out with f*cked religeon it just causes problems

mr. incrediball wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

mr. incrediball wrote: 2: true, you can't see radiation or the wind, but you can see the affect they have on things you can see, as opposed to witches, angels and demons.

I can see the effect that they have on things.

now this is where it starts to get stupid, isn't it just humans that cause suffering? not demons and witches? and what effect do angels have on life?

If you have ever seen the movie The Exorcist it was based on a true story. As well as The Exorcism of Emily Rose was also based on actual events. So demons have an "effect on things".

Witches cast spells. Not unlike voodoo witchdoctors that do effect the person the spell was targeted to. (this is demonic and I do not recomend dabbleing in it)

Angels sometime intervine with human affairs. Sometimes saving lives to suddenly "disappear".

jay_a2j wrote:If you have ever seen the movie The Exorcist it was based on a true story. As well as The Exorcism of Emily Rose was also based on actual events. So demons have an "effect on things".

Witches cast spells. Not unlike voodoo witchdoctors that do effect the person the spell was targeted to. (this is demonic and I do not recomend dabbleing in it)

Angels sometime intervine with human affairs. Sometimes saving lives to suddenly "disappear".

You poor, misguided fool

hitandrun wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:If you have ever seen the movie The Exorcist it was based on a true story. As well as The Exorcism of Emily Rose was also based on actual events. So demons have an "effect on things".

Witches cast spells. Not unlike voodoo witchdoctors that do effect the person the spell was targeted to. (this is demonic and I do not recomend dabbleing in it)

Angels sometime intervine with human affairs. Sometimes saving lives to suddenly "disappear".

You poor, misguided fool

Yup, it gets better

If: Exorcist + Emily Rose = proof for existence of demons
and: Witches = true
then: Jay is actually a wind up merchant. People stopped being this mad in the middle ages.

^I agree, thousands of people across the world in the 1600's because idiots like Jay thought they were witches, I could see from your point of veiw until you started saying witches exist!


oh btw:

There is 1 book in the bible i've read: Revelations, and it tought me 3 things:

1: satan doesn't exist yet and won't till the apocolypse
2: hell doesn't exist and again won't until the apocolypse
3: satan doesn't live in hell until he is banished there by god at the end of the apocolypse.

jay_a2j wrote:Give me a break. I don't care if it took trillions of years we'd still see evidence of it. But we don't. Why? Cause its bunk!

I don't think you understand the concept of trillions. You making this statement is the equivalent of someone glancing at a bowl of water for one second and stating that evaporation is bunk since he saw no change in the water level.

jay_a2j wrote:Another example of evasion. Speech is LEARNED. Therefore, someone who already knows how to talk must TEACH someone who doesn't. If a baby was born and he was never exposed to human speech, that child would never speak. Your agrgument doesn't hold water.

We didn't evolve from apes? You had better tell that to the scientific community! Even my First Aid instructor in college said, "Our tail bone is what is left of our tail through evolution." (rolls eyes) My Sociology 101 professor had a poster of an ape, through several stages it became man.

Apes, an unspeaking animal taught us humans how to speak? ROFL You guys believe this yet have a hard time with the idea of God! This too is bunk.

I don't think you understand the difference between speech and language. Speech is simply the ability to make utterances and, as I'm sure you are aware, newborns have the ability to do this quite readily without any coaching from anyone. Language, on the other hand, is a mutually agreed upon system whereby sounds and gestures have meanings attached to them. You seem to think that language had to have been given to humans in a complete form, completely ignoring the possibility of long-term development. While our primate ancestors would not have passed on fully developed languages, they probably would have had rudimentary systems for communication (much like we see in the animal kingdom today) involving grunting, posturing and the like. From there, it would have taken only one early human to have the idea to attach a specific meaning to a specific sound and one other early human to understand and agree upon this idea. After that, this first word could be taught to other members of that society and the following generations. Language could develop from there, especially if language development was occuring in multiple early human societies at once and these societies interacted with one another. Language, as I've pointed out to you before, is created through invention. Why do you think they're always updating and editing dictionaries?

While it's true that babies will not acquire language unless they're taught, it's also true that babies will not toilet train themselves. Is this too evidence against evolution? Did God teach us to use toilets? I think not. In both cases, children require teaching in order to use human inventions which developed over time. The only difference is that you can accept that toilets are human inventions while you refuse to believe that language is something we might have come up with on our own.

jay_a2j wrote:So then we have an eternal "virus" that was the cause of all creation! (I'm glad I didn't get too into drugs as a youth) Logic dictates (because life cannot come from non-life) that something has to be eternal. Otherwise life cannot exist! Again, unless you believe that the first life or "semi-life" poped up from nothing.

I may be wrong but I think energy is supposed to be eternal - it's never lost nor made - it just changes form. It is also the foundation of life and matter. Where did energy come from? I have no idea. Your answer would be God and suppose this guess is as good as any other.

jay_a2j wrote:First of all we must agree that there is a difference between evolution and adaptation. Animals can adapt to their surroundings but they can not become a completely different animal. The arch was a big boat. And if this was the boat >>> http://english.sdaglobal.org/evangelism/arch/noah.htm then it had 3 decks. The bottom deck alone consisting of 144 rooms.

Now as far as animals on the arch, all of them were gathered on the arch "each according to its kind". "two by two" (a male and female so they could reproduce later) Does that mean when the CAT boarded the boat it was 2 callico,2 simease etc. or just 1 pair of cat which would later reproduce and depending on where they went to live adapted to their enviornments and became different breeds yet remained cats none the less. No one knows outside of God. But this is not evolution. Its adaptation. Just like if you didn't move your right arm for a period of time you would lose the use of it forever. Are you then a new species of human?

I think you're the one who requires a better understanding of the difference between evolution and adaption. Evolution involves genetic mutation. If I lose the use of my arm, that doesn't mean that my children will be born without the use of theirs. Evolution deals solely with the traits caused by genetic mutations. If a new trait makes an organism more likely to survive and reproduce, that trait will be passed genetically to the offspring of the "mutant", who in turn will be more likely to survive and reproduce and so on.

mr. incrediball wrote:^I agree, thousands of people across the world in the 1600's because idiots like Jay thought they were witches, I could see from your point of veiw until you started saying witches exist!


oh btw:

There is 1 book in the bible i've read: Revelations, and it tought me 3 things:

1: satan doesn't exist yet and won't till the apocolypse
2: hell doesn't exist and again won't until the apocolypse
3: satan doesn't live in hell until he is banished there by god at the end of the apocolypse.

Taken from Wikopedia (sp?):


Witchcraft, in various historical, religious and mythical contexts, is the use of certain kinds of alleged supernatural or magical powers. A witch is a person who practices witchcraft, and may be male or female. In historical, mythological and demonological contexts a male "witch" is more frequently termed a wizard, sorcerer, warlock, or simply a magician.

Practitioners of Neopagan witchcraft generally refer to themselves as "witches," regardless of their sex, and shun the term "warlock" as denoting a witch who has broken their oaths and betrayed their fellows.

The term witchcraft can have positive or negative connotations depending on cultural context; for instance, in post-Christian European cultures it has historically been associated with dualistic notions of evil and the Devil, while most modern practitioners see it as beneficent and morally positive.


And you need to read Revelation again. You might try other books as well as Satan is first mentioned in Genesis in the Garden of Eden.

Jolly Roger wrote: I think you're the one who requires a better understanding of the difference between evolution and adaption. Evolution involves genetic mutation. If I lose the use of my arm, that doesn't mean that my children will be born without the use of theirs. Evolution deals solely with the traits caused by genetic mutations. If a new trait makes an organism more likely to survive and reproduce, that trait will be passed genetically to the offspring of the "mutant", who in turn will be more likely to survive and reproduce and so on.

Your concepts of evolution/adaptation are consistent with mine. The question posed at the end of my post had a hint of sarcasim....possibly so small it went undetected.

I assert however, that adaptation occurs whereas evolution does not.

I know I'm biased towards the Christian side but here goes:

If we were to leave all bias at the door as Jay said we should, there would be no argument. We would all agree that there is religion and that it may or may not be true. We would agree that not everyone believes the same thing and many people shun other peoples' beliefs and vise-versa. But then, of course, there would be no argument. And as we have been conversing each with his or her own full-on bias to one side, we are arguing for no reason at all. Us Christians are biased to the fact that God exists and that the rest of you refuse to believe it because of something that doesn't click in your Missouri-mule minds. You all believe that we are a bunch of mislead airheads who are not "evolved" enough to realize that there is no God. Us Christians then dismiss you as delusional, and you accuse us of being fundamentalists who ignore science. We retaliate by saying that science proves our point, and on and on. The fact is that this argument could go on forever until we are all old and grey and dying. And us Christians will probably never assert you of the fact that God exists, and you Mini Margaret Murrays will CERTAINLY never convince us of your delusional views. So there's really no point to this argument, and arguing for the sake of arguing is a sin, which is why I think this thread should die. That's my two cents.

And maybe Evolution happened within those first seven days of existance, under direct guidance from God. But it didn't happen over hundreds of thousands of years, because we have only existed for 6000-10000 years, far too short a time for any of your delusional evolutionist theory to have taken place. I agree with Jay that adaptation is real but evolution is probably not and the two are too easily intertwined.


*is out of breath*

If God is a FACT, where is the evidence to support it? Is there any clear evidence that humans have only been around for 6000-10000 years? Perhaps the reason that there can be no resolution to this argument is that you mistake your beliefs for facts and your feelings for evidence.

^couldn't have put it better myself.

Actually, if you read the OT (which is the Hebrew Torah), Satan isn't the serpent. The serpent was just a serpent.

It didn't become Satan until St. Augustine got a hold of the book and wrote an apocryphal text on it.

happysadfun wrote:And maybe Evolution happened within those first seven days of existance, under direct guidance from God. But it didn't happen over hundreds of thousands of years, because we have only existed for 6000-10000 years, far too short a time for any of your delusional evolutionist theory to have taken place. I agree with Jay that adaptation is real but evolution is probably not and the two are too easily intertwined.

What? So we evolution couldn't be possible because we've only been around for 6000-10000 years and we haven't evolved? Is that right?

Did you catch chicken pox as a child? Did you gain an immunity to it? That's a mutation. Your body adapted to the virus by creating antibodies to combat it so if the virus ever comes around again your body immediately knows that it's there and takes it out before it can infect you again.

God didn't do that. It's adaptation. That's evolution.

You have adapted a defense against the pathogen and have evolved ever so slightly higher than those who don't have the immunity.

But then again, you think there's a difference and you'll retort with "But we're still humans, we haven't evolved."

Forgive me if I view this whole position as a bit silly. I mean, if God did everything then that would pretty much negate anything we humans can do.

That means we shouldn't even try to learn anything, and we should just abolish schools. I mean, God put you in this country right? So by that logic why learn about the rest of the world? Why bother learning how to use a computer? I mean, if God is the creator and He does have a plan for us then we don't need to make any actions or do anything in our lives to lead us from point A to point B. God will do that for us.

is it in anyway possible that god used evolution? has anybody ever thought that? i mean, is it possible that not everything is black and white, but maybe gray?

vtmarik wrote:Actually, if you read the OT (which is the Hebrew Torah), Satan isn't the serpent. The serpent was just a serpent.

It didn't become Satan until St. Augustine got a hold of the book and wrote an apocryphal text on it.

I am aware its called the Torah. Are you mad? The serpant mentioned in Genesis is Satan. Satan is called by many names.... The Father of Lies, the Evil One, the "one who decieves", and serpant to name a few.

P Gizzle wrote:is it in anyway possible that god used evolution? has anybody ever thought that? i mean, is it possible that not everything is black and white, but maybe gray?

Actually no. If we are talking about Christianity.

GEN 1:24

And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds"

Meaning a dog will breed dogs, a goat will breed goats and apes will breed apes.

jay_a2j wrote:Actually no. If we are talking about Christianity.

GEN 1:24

And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds"

Meaning a dog will breed dogs, a goat will breed goats and apes will breed apes.

Unless you've sown emu seeds and had a bunch of emus spring out of the ground, the land does not produce creatures.

vtmarik wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:Actually no. If we are talking about Christianity.

GEN 1:24

And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds"

Meaning a dog will breed dogs, a goat will breed goats and apes will breed apes.

Unless you've sown emu seeds and had a bunch of emus spring out of the ground, the land does not produce creatures.

It does if God says it does.

Ah, ok. I see.

So a bunch of animals sprung out of the ground waaaaay back when, but now they don't do that anymore.

If that is possible, then the animals breeding and continuing genetic lines must be an adaptation.


Did these early, from-the-ground animals have reproductive organs? Sounds like evolution to me.

vtmarik wrote:Ah, ok. I see.

So a bunch of animals sprung out of the ground waaaaay back when, but now they don't do that anymore.

If that is possible, then the animals breeding and continuing genetic lines must be an adaptation.


Did these early, from-the-ground animals have reproductive organs? Sounds like evolution to me.

Thats a real small box you're putting God in. Guess He couldn't have created Adam from the "dust of the Earth" either. Nor woman from Adams rib.