Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: Augray <augray@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 07:34:10 -0400
On Thu, 28 May 2009 21:46:29 -0500, "[M]adman" <adman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in <UTHTl.3589$Xl4.2818@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> :
unrestrained_hand@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 27, 9:12 am, "[M]adman" <ad...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
unrestrained_h...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 26, 3:53 pm, "[M]adman" <ad...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
unrestrained_h...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 26, 7:44 am, Boikat <boi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 26, 9:33 am, unrestrained_h...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
<snip>
Any one of these could have been fixed by an omnipotent being,
but then one has to ask:
"Why would a god kill almost all life, then hide the evidence
for this with dozens of major, but unmentioned, miracles?"-
Or, why did he not simply "speak" the evil and corrupt out if
existence? Quicker, cleaner, and equally as believable.
Boikat
I was thinking that an engineered virus - excuse me, a plague -
would have done the job in under a year with considerably less
cleanup. If the idea was to impress everybody, why the secret and
miraculous covering of tracks? Sounds more like a child's tantrum,
who then cleans up before Mommy sees the mess he made.unitchin
Kermit
You k0oks already /know/ that the universe has laws it operates by.
Change the laws, you change the universe.
God did rather nicely destroying the evil that needed to be
destroyed while insuring life on this planet would come back and
thrive; all the while staying with in the natural laws that HE put
into place.
So if he only needed to destroy the evil people, why didn't he do it
with a virus?
You really put a lot of faith in selection eh?
No, I have a contingent belief in the existence of a reality external
to me. I do not think this universe is the result of my feverish
imagination.
Oh now it is contingent ? Hell, the way YOU describe it, YOUR version of
reality is all there is.
It's certainly closer to reality than yours.
Well. You are wrong.
And you're worse than wrong, because you're uninterested in being
right.
My faith in reality has held up so far. If you do not trust the
evidence of your senses, what makes you think that "ancient texts" are
not simply a blot of mustard, or a bit of undigested potato?
Interpretation of the evidence can be wrong.
"ancient texts" are not a blot of mustard. That statement would be an
accurate interpretation of reality.
Believing in evolution. Well. That is NOT an accurate interpretation of
reality.
And believing that the Sun rides across the sky in a chariot is?
If you *do trust the evidence of your senses, why do you fear
verifiable data, or the very act of verification?
Many things we see and observe can have more then a single interpretation
when physical senses alone are used to evaluate them.
But when you evaluate with your 'spiritual' senses, there is no error.
In other words, you really think that the Sun rides across the sky in
a chariot.
And why the multitude of unmentioned miracles whose sole purpose
seems to be to hide the fact [sic] that there was a flood?
I do not think you understand just how destructive water can be.
Actually I do. If it's so destructive, where is the trail it should
leave behind?
Why would your god cover his tracks with other, secret miracles?
You have no idea what the earth looked like PRE-flood in order to make a
comparison the POST-earth of today.
There was no Flood, so there was no PRE-flood era. It's THAT simple.
.
- References:
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: unrestrained_hand
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: Boikat
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: unrestrained_hand
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: [M]adman
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: unrestrained_hand
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: [M]adman
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: unrestrained_hand
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- From: [M]adman
- Re: Yes. They all fit
- Prev by Date: Re: Yes. They all fit
- Next by Date: Re: Darwin's egregious error
- Previous by thread: Re: Yes. They all fit
- Next by thread: Re: Yes. They all fit
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
