Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Before I come to the point of my posting some things ahead.
I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I firmly believe in God and I go to the church about 4 times per week to pray(however, without attending the service).

I would estimate myself as a little more of a believer than the average citizen in Germany and in Bavaria, the state where I am living.

I also regard myself well-educated (I speak two languages and I have written 5 books so far). Also I regard my general education as above average (hope this sounds not boastful).

Whatever...

I had to become 48 years old to learn that they are actually people (apart from 88-year-old grannies) who believe that the world was created in 6 days.

As I matter of fact, I never met someone like that before in Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Great Britain, Austria, The Netherlands and in Denmark (the countries I have visited so far in Europe) without of course Jehova's witnesses who are smiled at (to put it mildy) by the majority of the people here in Europe.

But even these people (who rather let their relatives die when a blood transfusion after a road accident is necessary) can live in peace here without being denounced.

It was positively a shock to me to learn that a significant number of adult, maybe even well-educated people in the U.S. believe that God created the world in 6 days as it read in the Holy Bible.

I told some of my friends and acquaintances and got uncredulous looks for that.

To get that straight: Such an opinion is unheard-of here.

In my opinion the Holy Bible was written in a way that the people who lived hundreds of years ago understand it's contend.
They wouldn't have understood lines who read that God created by using the evolution.

I am also perturbed by the fact, that a country where a significant number of creation believer is living is the most powerful nation of the world. Maybe even the President of this country believes that God has made the world in 6 days?
Alarming...

Once more I am glad that I don't live in a country where the customers of prostituts who get caught are published in the local newspapers, where you have to be dressed in the sauna, where it is forbidden to take a sunbath undressed in public and where you are denounced in certain regions when you don't believe in God.

In Germany prostitution is legal, you can take an undressed sunbath in a public park (just look at the English Garden in Munich), Sauna is attended naked and there is no discrimination of unreligious people.
-----
The #1 Boa constrictor site in the world wide web

` So, that would mean that you have asked everyone you have met ( so far ) in "Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Great Britain, Austria, The Netherlands and in Denmark (the countries you have visited so far in Europe )" to explain to you what their dogmatic preconceptions about creation are??? Or, does it just show?

` Damn, you must be a real sensation at parties.

` We are all in the same boat. The problem is that we don't accept it.
-----

Stop the world-I want to get off!

It is unheard of in Europe that there are people who actually still believe in creation (except Jehova's witnesses, of course who are not taken seriously and 88-year-old grannies who take the Bible literally).

You can trust me in this matter since I am living here.

Maybe you have some contacts in Europe then just ask them (unless they are Jehova's witnesses and grannies, of course).

Speaking of being a real sensation at parties: Go to a party here and tell the people about the creation theory. Then you will experience being a real sensation. *LOL*

Are you a supporter of this theory? Then how do you explain the C14 method for determination the age of a substance?
With this method a lot of things have been determined to be older than 10.000 years.

The C14 method: Devils work to confuse the people? UUUUHHH AAHHHHH

The next thing I expect from you guys is to claim that the earth is a disk.

` You want to do 'seriously'? Really? You want to rock the boat? That is one of the things most Americans fear. They want to remain 'fat cats'.

` It is about discrimination, that is correct; however, that is only one aspect of the problem.
` The United States is being strangled and stunted by the majority of its people who need to belong to a group, or belief system. They then have a good reason/excuse to discriminate. Lines between beliefs are sharply drawn, and those on opposite sides feed the polarities. While the Europeans have grown into a practice of acceptance, tolerance, and ( a little more ) open mindedness ( after paying an awful price for not being so ), the Americans have become the keepers of many of the old dogmas which generate so much distrust, hate, and pain.
` This is a country where millions and millions of citizens at least tacitly support people who murder physicians who have performed abortions. That is amazing to me. Many are actively supporting the belief systems which generate these murders. They fall into the same general groups, and many more specific groups who want their belief system to not only be preserved, but to be the only one allowed. In other words, " I vill talk, und you vill listen." Does that sound historically familiar?
` Our government, our whole society in fact, has tied itself in knots and become stagnant from polarized, dogmatic tribal warfare. You don't have to make much of a point if you can discredit your opponent is some way. A politician's self-serving agenda will prevail if he can simply discredit, or intimidate his opponents.
` The government's failures at governing are not too important, sad to say. We have two parties which field candidates for elections. These two parties fanatically guard their shared sovereignty . No other party has any chance of electing more than a few candidates, let alone form an influential group in our government. Fuggetaboutit. Whichever party has a majority in our government doesn't make much difference. Their primary purpose will be to preserve what power they have, and to try to add to it by removing some from their adversaries ( who are not really adversaries but similar opportunists ). Issues to be legislated, and most other actions of government are pre-judged by the sides, it is always about who is in favor, and who is against, who in government will look good supporting, or opposing the issue. The merits of the actions of government are generally secondary ( at least ) to the importance of which side supports it. And, as this takes place those who are disadvantaged become more so.
` Most of the followers don't have enough consciousness to understand more than the basic catchphrases of their group. They usually know more about what they are against, than what they support.

` Imagine what it is like to live in a powerful society whose leaders are followers, cronies, and slick opportunists, and in which the majority fears change, and is duped into believing that they, too can become like the affluent, so they live for that. Soon, we will have a modern version of 'debtors prison'.It makes me want to vomit.

` Do I believe in the religious dogma of creation?? Hell no. I am much too familiar with the behavior of humans to believe anything other than that we truly did evolve from slime.

` Too bad we can't learn from this.

` Ahhh, that felt pretty good. Now, where's my Lithium?

-----

Stop the world-I want to get off!

What can I say? The country that was created to stop oppression and free the human spirit is now run by clock stoppers, prudes, and the repressors.

The red state- blue state map really shows how bad its gotten.

Have to say, my own Mother voted red and she has recently come to discover that most of the people she backed don't think Catholics (which she is) are Christian!

As for nude saunas...well if you can chose your company that might be scenic.

And funny thing...Nevada - the only state where Prostitution is legal doesnt have the problem the rest of the country has in that dept.

Land of the Free....fraid we're loosing it.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Hey there!!!!

Your post was very good and I enjoyed reading it. Thanks for your post!

Here is my opinion:

I am just as alarmed as you are, but am alarmed that there are those who believe in the theory of evoloution that the world was formed by chance. I do not look down on anyone that does not share my views on this subject nor the subject of God. Being a born again Christian, my own righteousness is but filthy rags. There is no reason to get upset with differing views, as I offer respect to those who post what they believe, as I expect the same in return.

To me, it takes a lot more faith to believe in something like chance and that we as humans evolved. It was actually nature and the herps we all love and keep that actually helped me draw the conclusion of a holy and righteous God creating the heavens and the earth. My snake collections have always been a testimony to His awesome power and creative work.

The Bible is historical and accurate historically. This is not my opinion but the opinion of theologans, scientists, archeologists, etc. It is amazing how the prophecies of Christ in the Old Testament came to pass precisely. It is amazing how the earth is set in an area where if it moved closer to the sun, we would all burn, and if the earth moved away, we would all freeze. Was chance able to do that? I see no reason why that is even thinkable.

Remember, this idea of creation is not an American idea, nor is God an American God. There are people all over the world that believe that God created the heavens and the earth. Does that make it true? Nope. Does what the church say make it true? Nope. The evidence of a Creator God is very well apparent everywhere you look. And...the fact that man is a sinner is pretty evident as well. Through God's gift to us with the beauty of nature, etc., He is wanting your attention.

Take care!

Billy

-----
Genesis 1:1

So does it make any more sense that some entity (let us call IT god) just "popped out of thin air"? I have read lots of great books that were "historically accurate" (your term, not mine)...Julius Ceasar, The Diary of Anne Frank...do you see where I am going with this? BTW, I really doubt that Noah (or any of the other characters in the bible) lived over 900 years. I CHOOSE not to put faith in anything that has been used to discriminate or mistreat others. Does "slavery" ring a bell? If it doesn't you may want to take another look at "the good book"! I have no issues with anyone who wishes to believe in whatever religion they choose; however, these beliefs should not be used to explain things that are scientific in nature. How many people have been persecuted for disagreeing with the church only to have it later discovered that those people were right (the world really isn't flat)?
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

"I have read lots of great books that were "historically accurate" (your term, not mine)...Julius Ceasar, The Diary of Anne Frank...do you see where I am going with this? "

As far as being historical, you don't need me to say anything. History itself is the example. It is fact that Jesus existed, the cities of the Old Testament, the writers of the Bible, etc. Are we only supposed to believe the Bible in the things we want it to be true and when it says something we disagree with, just simply say," oh..that never happened?" In other words, the Bible can't be partially true in some ways and in other ways, not true. Kind of like scientific fact....you can't say that a snake's tongue is their guide for taste, smell, awareness of surroundings, etc. one minute and then say it is not true the next. That would not be very scientfic.

"I CHOOSE not to put faith in anything that has been used to discriminate or mistreat others. Does "slavery" ring a bell? If it doesn't you may want to take another look at "the good book"!"

Maybe it is what people tried to do and have done with the Bible to suppport their own selfish desires is what the real problem is. As far as being discrimatory, you really want me to post quotes from Darwin and Thomas Huxley that are so racist and hateful towards others that are not caucasian? It all had to do with their view of survival of the fittest.

"I have no issues with anyone who wishes to believe in whatever religion they choose; however, these beliefs should not be used to explain things that are scientific in nature. How many people have been persecuted for disagreeing with the church only to have it later discovered that those people were right (the world really isn't flat)?"

Again, you are speaking about ridiculous acts done in the name of God and not the main issue I am speaking about, which was the probability of chance being the creator and not the Creator Himself.

Take care!

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

I have 2 degrees in biology & have read Darwin's volumous work. Please feel free to cite all offensive parts (and yeah, throw in the work of Wallace or Huxley or any other scientist). The problem with people's view of religion is that they use whatever parts are convient for them and try to explain away any issues they feel do not apply to them. After all you know the bible is "open to interpretation".
You sure seem to be certain that there is no alternative to your God, good luck with the "afterlife".
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

Actually Billy there is a large flaw to your argument. Stating that "all must be true becuse part of it is" flies in the face of Logic.

The Illiad describes a war between the Greeks and Trojans. Troy has been found, so it is a fact that the city existed and was destroyed. (actually several times)

However. Homer also describes the involvement of the Gods. Under the logic you use, you are saying the Greek Gods existed since thyt are active participants in a historical document.

In the history of Alexander the Great it is written that his path to India was blocked by "large flying Shields..." UFOs maybe?

Even much more modern history is subject to a variety of versions. How many different versions of the battle of the ALAMO are there? And each claims to be correct.

Ancient (and not so ancient) historians were prone to embellishment and selective writing. Hill's point is correct.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

I don't feel me putting some of these quotes would go well with the TOS. Shoot me an email on the message link at the top of the post if you are interested.

Take care!

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

Not really necessary, I am sure you are referring to the "savages" statement that has been attributed to Darwin. Once again, how does that invalidate his work or the theory of evolution as a valid scientific theory? Also, how does that make him a "racist"? Any group of people who didn't live the way Europeans lived (at that time period) were considered "savages". There is no evidence that Darwin condoned slavery, unlike portions of the bible which CLEARLY CONDONES SLAVERY.
BTW...there are many physiological differences between the races, obvious examples of natural selection (the mechanism for evolution)! Does that statement make me a racist?
I am still pretty interested in how the theory of evolution is in confict with your beliefs.
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

"I am sure you are referring to the "savages" statement that has been attributed to Darwin. Once again, how does that invalidate his work or the theory of evolution as a valid scientific theory?"

Oh yeah, him and Huxley both made some outlandish statements concerning other races. Their opinions of people that were not white like themselves were not far from someone like Hitler.

"Also, how does that make him a "racist"? Any group of people who didn't live the way Europeans lived (at that time period) were considered "savages". "

His comments would leave someone to suspect him of that. If someone has the knowledge of the things they said towards other races, then why even bother giving any credence to them to begin with. Survival of the fittest, in their context, ties together with that.

" There is no evidence that Darwin condoned slavery, unlike portions of the bible which CLEARLY CONDONES SLAVERY. "

No, actually it does not. While white supremist groups would of course try to twist things to what they would want it to say, if you really read about that subject in the Bible, you will know that God does not condone slavery. Was there slavery in the Bible? Yeah, but there was slavery in that time that these chapters were written due to the cultures at that time. Just because it existed during Biblical times does not mean that GOD condoned it.

"BTW...there are many physiological differences between the races, obvious examples of natural selection (the mechanism for evolution)! Does that statement make me a racist? "

I would have to disagree. Why would there be still many different races if Evolution teaches survival of the fittest? In Darwin's eyes, those people not like him were not the stronger ones, but would be exterminated and replaced. Yes, there are physiological differences between the races, but once again, that does not even touch on the reasoning of " if evolution was true". No, that does not make you a racist.

"I am still pretty interested in how the theory of evolution is in confict with your beliefs."

Natural selection was the reasoning behind Darwin's theory. God creating the world is vastly different. Evolution says we are just animals. God says we are man in need of a Saviour. There are absolutes we are aware of.

Thanks for your comments! Take care!~

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

Comparing Darwin to Hitler is apples to oranges. Hitler was trying to eliminate an entire population of people, Darwin never said anything about getting rid of anyone. The bible does clearly condone slavery, are you familiar with Lev. 25 (specifically 25:44)? I am amazed that you pooh pooh the idea that the bible condones slavery by saying it was written at a time when slavery existed. Yet I said that the use of the term savages was used to describe people who were not living as the "civilized Europeans" of the time, and you equate that to racism & applauding slavery on the part of Darwin. Most people would still say that people lving in the bush (of Africa and South America) are savages. People here used the term "savages" to describe the out of control criminals in New Orleans not too long ago! The differences in races CAN most certainly be attributed to environmental differences...skin color is the perfect example! Melanin protects the skin from the harmful sun, obviously people who are in an environment where they are exposed to the sun would need more melanine! Sickle cell disease is another example, look it up.
We are ANIMALS, it is our arrogance that makes us believe we're "god's favorite"!
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

Words change in meaning and definition as time goes by. I think we can all agree with that. To apply 21st century meanings to the words of someone who wrote almost 200 yrs ago is foolish.

Twain (who was a devout Abolishionist) used the (N) word to apply to people of African orrigion. This did not make him a racist any more than the common attitude that Non-civilised people were savages. It was the common vernacular of the time.

In fact the word orrigionated because many slaves came from Nigeria. The word was a corruption of the term.

To a pure scientist the racial differences that are obvious (but not talked about would be a source of speculation). For example, large lips are considered a specialization (hardly primitive). White skin is found on all the great apes. Black skin is again, an adaptation which shows a more evolved being.

Looking at it that way the ridiculous assumption that Darwin might in any way be like Hitler is just spreading mis-information in a spiteful attempt to discredit him.

Totally unworthy of an intelligent debate on this subject.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

We have been over this before (way too many times).

I respect Faith-it is a matter of individual conscience.

However, Faith is not fact. The willingness to experience intense faith does not make things true that simply are not.

The Bible was written by men who claimed to be writting the word of their God. Right off the top, Christianity is a minority religeon. Lots more Moslems, Buddists, Taoists, etc....

Now as was pointed out, all peoples have legends of their origions and their past history-often incorporated with their various dieties that they worship. The Illiad is a prime example, so is Beowolf.

That there are actual historical events present does not prove the existence of a God.

If you want accurate prophacy - check Nostradamus.

There has never been a stick of evidence of a supreme being that could not be explained by pure science. (If I have missed one feel free to include).

Even the words of the Bible it self are suspect as it was passed by word of mouth and then when written, has been translated according to the beliefs of those who did the work. This process is still going on today.

The "Imaculate Conception" which is the basis for Christianty is based on a translation of a Hebrew word to mean VIRGIN. The same word also translates to mean "A YOUNG WOMAN". So pick the translation you want and have a miracle - or not.

See it is easy to believe in a world that is tenderly watched over by some Benevelant Father Figure. It is harder to realize that we are on our own...and the world we have, has only ourselves to be held accountable for.

It is far more pleasant to hide behind dreams. Just don't ask the rest of us to ignore seeking the truth when it doesn't fit your faith.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Frank,

Believe it or not, I hear exactly what you are saying and have thought a lot of the same things. Yes, we have been over this a few times ( LOL! ) and actually, I really respect you and hold you and your opinion quite high, even though we may not agree on the Evoloution/Creation issue. I always enjoy reading your posts when I find them and I think you are really intelligent.

" I respect Faith-it is a matter of individual conscience."

I agree.

"However, Faith is not fact. The willingness to experience intense faith does not make things true that simply are not. "

I agree. My faith does not make anything factual. In fact..what I say does not dictate anything. In other words, yes, I have strong opinions on the Bible and the Lord but just because I believe them to be true does not make them automatically fact or true to someone else. It is the convicting work of the Holy Spirit that does that, not myself.

"The Bible was written by men who claimed to be writting the word of their God. Right off the top, Christianity is a minority religeon. Lots more Moslems, Buddists, Taoists, etc...."

The thing that separates " Christianity " from others is simply Christ. He said, " I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through Me." All other religions say that either He was a good teacher, prophet, etc. Jesus claimed to be God and according to the Bible, was God in the flesh. Thing is..He rose from the dead. This is what separates Him from others. This is an issue of Him being Lord, not any church, denomination, religion, etc. .

" That there are actual historical events present does not prove the existence of a God. "

I agree. Any event does not actually prove there is a God. An event in time can not do that. What I am saying is that the events in the Bible are historical. So if that is true, then why wouldn't we want to come to the realization that what Christ said was true, that Him rising from the dead was true? We have a problem with that. We do not want to give Him lordship, we only want to go our own way.

" See it is easy to believe in a world that is tenderly watched over by some Benevelant Father Figure. It is harder to realize that we are on our own...and the world we have, has only ourselves to be held accountable for.
It is far more pleasant to hide behind dreams. Just don't ask the rest of us to ignore seeking the truth when it doesn't fit your faith. "

I am not asking anyone to ignore seeking the truth if it does not fit my faith. This is not, " I am right and you are wrong."
This whole thing I have been talking about is about seeking the truth to begin with! I believe we have the evidence right in front of us, with nature, snakes, (Pits mostly...lol!!!..kiddin...), the existence of absolute truths, the knowledge of rights and wrongs, and the testimony of Christ.

Thank you Frank for your great post!

Take care!

Billy

-----
Genesis 1:1

We all look at the same thing and draw our conclusions from how we interpret it.

Unfortunately, Again while I respect much of the philosophy of the Bible - there is no evidence to support Christ as having risen from the dead except some "eyewitnesses" who would benefit from spreading such a rumor.

If the story of the crucifiction is true (which is very questionable since Gov. Pillate does not mention it in his records) the Christians had been dealt a very serious blow. Their savior had been executed. To portray him as still alive and more - returned from the dead as an angel like being would lessen the damage the execution had on his followers's belief systems.

By the way....Hercules was killed (by a poisoned robe)and raised from the dead to become a full God. Sound familiar? And this miracle comes from a much older religion than Christianity.

I'm pleased to see this discusion is going so peacefully this time...

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

"We all look at the same thing and draw our conclusions from how we interpret it. "

Yes, in a sense, I can see what you mean. What is the reasoning behind our interpretation? In other words, are we saying what the Word says to fit into what we want the Word to say and to mold this image of God into what we want to worship, or our we looking at the Bible in such a non biased way, disregarding what our own opinions are, and if we do so choose to believe in God, are we asking Him point blank, " What do you mean in this book or passage?" Not, " this is what I want it to mean."

I used to do that Frank, and now after coming to Christ years ago, I now see how the Word shows me how much I need Him. And it is not just back then, but a daily thing. It goes against my sinful nature, and shows me how dead I am in my own selfishness.

"Unfortunately, Again while I respect much of the philosophy of the Bible - there is no evidence to support Christ as having risen from the dead except some "eyewitnesses" who would benefit from spreading such a rumor. "

There was a lot more eyewitnesses than you may think. 1 Cor. 15:6 is just one example of Him appearing to over 500.

"To portray him as still alive and more - returned from the dead as an angel like being would lessen the damage the execution had on his followers's belief systems. "

But He was not just an angel like being my friend! He is God in the flesh! Have you ever studied the details of the crucifixion, burial tomb, etc.? It is quite remarkable to say the least.

"I'm pleased to see this discusion is going so peacefully this time... "

I have always enjoyed conversing with you Frank!! I appreciate your insight and intelligence you bring to any discussion.

Billy

-----
Genesis 1:1

Frankly, here is part of the problem.

You are willing to embrace the Bible as the written word of your God and therefore uncontestable truth.

I look at it the same way I do the myths of the Greeks and other peoples. Unless there are facts to support miracles, I discount them as embellishment.

Christ rose from the dead? You expect me to believe the so called eyewitness that wrote 500 people were there? I am certain that if you talked with a Greek they could make an equally compelling arguement about Hercules.

Thus elaborate descriptions written in a book that is intended to direct people towards a specific religion have serious credibility issues.

As to your own issues. A man must make peace with his nature or sucumb to it. Faith is a tool that helps many over come their personal flaws. I do not knock Faith.

But when it collides with fact, I will go for fact every time. And the bottom line is that the Bible has some history, a lot of fable and some rather good philosophies to guide you life by.

So do the other religions.

Have you ever read Aesop? How could you ask for a better moral guide than his fables that out date the New Testiment by hundreds of years? Funny how so many of his teachings are so much like the philosophies of the Bible---but much older.

The Bible did not have the corner on good moral advice. And (as in condoning slavery) it sometimes falls way short.

So no....What the Bible wrights of his tomb and crucifiction lacks evidence to support it from a non biased witness.

For that, I'd sooner take the advice of a used car salesman. At least he isn't hiding that he is just trying to sell me his goods.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

The early christians faced almost certain death by proclaiming the resurrection. One of the only apostles who DID NOT die for the faith was John. So christianity was not a wise life choice if you valued your life. There IS much archealogical and historical evidence to support the Bible. Until recently people doubted the validity of Pilate until his name was found on a Roman artifact in 1961.

http://www.probe.org/content/view/1062/64/

You have made your choice and I respect that. But just know that there are evidences apart from the Bible itself that back up the claims of it(the Bible). You can do with them as you wish but to make no choice is to choose.

In that the Bible contains some actual history is well documented. There is No correlation between the book and it's alledged miracles.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Well, just because something supernatural happens, I do not immediately discount it. The Bible has more than proven itself to be a credible set of books. You disagree, so be it. But people sometimes say the Bible is false because certain things "can't happen" instead of didn't happen. This is a philosophical disagreement instead of historical. I have seen the evidence for and against the Bible and believe in it. I just can't explain away prophecies and the historicities of it.

Hill4803,

Yes, I am familiar with the subject of slavery that people try to use to blend the Bible and the ideal of condoning it. White Supremists, the KKK, etc. have tried to bring up the idea that the Bible actually condones slavery. See...this is what I have been talking about. People try to mold parts of the Bible to fit into their argument or beliefs without considering the context of everything. Context, context, context!! It is so important that when we read the Bible, we are understanding or trying to understand what is being said and to put aside our own selfish wants.

In the instance of slavery, if you read 1 Tim. 1:10, it puts slave traders in the same category as murderers, perverts, adulterers, etc. Also, take a read into Ephesians 6. Slavery in the Old Testament was sanctioned due to economic realities, not racial motives. People voluntarilty sold themselves into slavery since there were no bankruptcy laws. To say the Bible promotes slavery, instead of knowing that it recognized the reality of slavery, is absurd and a poor shot of trying to denounce the credibility of scripture. In fact, due to the application of Biblical beliefs and principles, that is what led to the overthrow of slavery, both in ancient Israel and the USA.

You mocked the idea of us being God's favorite? Well, favorite may not be the right word but you know.." For God so loved the world (me and you!!!)that He gave His only begotten Son."

On a side note....I checked out your website. Very nice sinaloans milksnakes !!!!! I actually have an 11 year old male from The Snake Room ( Stan and Andrea Grumbeck ) as well. I got him in 1994 and has been the only one I have kept since then.
Very cool!!!!

Rearfang ( Frank ),

You can believe evolution and that is fine my friend. We may just have to agree to disagree. I do believe it does take a lot more faith to believe in evolution and the chance of our world being formed thru natural selection. Chance is a big word in this subject and yet while I do understand the reasoning behind someone believing in evolution, I do believe that the evidence of a Creator is much stronger. I question then if we are animals, then what about morals or absolute truth. How do we know right from wrong??? Yes, people do act like animals, thus the reasoning behind us being like animals, but we do have the knowledge of good and evil. We do have a conscience. If you are willing to accept the Bible as being historical in some parts, don't you think it makes sense that all of it is true? Let me humbly ask you something else. Have you ever in your life believed in God and His Word?

Thank you Frank for your posts! I always do enjoy hearing what you have to say!!

Take care!

Billy

-----
Genesis 1:1

Billy,

Thanks for checking out my website, those pics are about a year old...need to put some new ones up.

Back to the debate at hand...this is from the King James version (why does there need to be so many versions?)
Leviticus-
25:44
Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
25:45
Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
25:46
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

I would say that spells it out pretty clearly that owning slaves gets the thumbs up. And yes this is the same part that was used for years to justify racism...by the Southern Baptists. It was nice of them to issue a formal apology a couple of years ago at the Southern Baptist convention.

I still find it interesting that some parts of the bible are taken literally and others are not. How does one decide what parts are ABSOLUTE and what parts are open to interpretation. Most mainstream religions have proposed that the world was not created in 6 "literal days" because we "don't know how long a day is to god", any thoughts on that one?

I haven't argued about some of the historical context of the bible, SOME of the events seem to have some archeological evidence; HOWEVER, many books have SOME historical aspects but the writer takes creative liberties to tell a story. The Quran also has some historical implications...so which is right, Islam or Christianity or ???
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

"1 Timothy 1:10 makes no mention of slave traders...

"10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;"

Bro, my Bible here says slave traders. This version you quoted may not say " slavetraders" but the term menstealers constitutes as the same thing.

And no,...again..the Bible does not condone slavery. I just explained to you the historical context of the reality of slavery in Biblical times in my last post. Please read it again. Ask anyone that knows the history of the Bible in those times. The Bible does NOT give a thumbs up on slavery, I can not stress that enough.

You asked a great question!! How do we know what to take literally when we read the Bible? I have asked that same question tons of times! Like I said before, context, context, context! Anyone can take one sentence and then say the Bible speaks as a whole on that issue. Examine that subject by using the index. That is a great way to get the WHOLE view Biblically on a subject you are reading about. Then, most importantly, pray and ask God what is he meaning! After all, it was through His spirit it was written.

And did you read Ephesians 6? Please do.

As to whether or not Islam or Christianity is right or wrong..ask yourself this. Does Islam say Jesus is Lord like He said He was? Unfortunately, it does not.

Take care!

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

Any fufilled prophecy in Islam? Do you know really where Christianity started? Jurusalem, the worst possible place if the apostles were lying. They would just have to say "Jesus, there was no jesus" or "Jesus didnt rise from the dead, look here is his body". It would have died out just like all the other jewish offshoots. Mohamed is dead. Jesus is alive.

People see the evidences for both sides and make a conclusion. As to why so many translations, well i believe most are done to make the Bible more understandable(ever tried to decypher some of the old english in the KJV). I believe as long as it accords with the greek and hebrew texts(of which we have thousands), more power to ya.
In Christ
Matt

interesting beliefs, the "we're right, everyone else is wrong because the bible says so!" opinion.

As far as the "translation" of the bible into the different versions...this leads to many problems, people interpret the language in the bible differently. Thats why the catholics have a pope...he interprets the bible (apparently the pope is god's right hand guy).
For instance, "manstealers" means kidnappers not slave traders. and several things that were not contained in the King James bible has been added to later versions. Once again, just because some of the things in the bible may have happened (jesus lived) doesn't mean that all parts of the bible are true (jesus is still alive or rose from the dead). If you read the book of mormon, many of the things in that bible also happened (more recently I might add!) and many people believe it to be the "real word of god". I'm sure your (billy & giantsfan) opinion will differ but why do you think the book of mormon is NOT the real word of god? Because your bible says so?
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

Because the Book of Mormon is full of errors.

http://www.contenderministries.org/mormonism/bomproblems.php

http://www.lifeway.com/lwc/lwc_cda_article/0,1643,A%3D156947%26X%3D1%26M%3D50088,00.html

http://www.godandscience.org/cults/mormarch.html

An observation...

To the Jews, the New Testament is full of errors...

To the Christians, the Book of Mormon is full of errors...

To an Atheist, all three books are full of errors....

and the Moslems cannot seem to come to grips with any of it.....

Frankly, It all comes down to whether you believe the authors, and using any statements within those pages to justify the validity of any of it ranks with believing Bush when he says he invaded Iraq to promote peace.

Now there is a question of Faith!

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

The christian bible has its problems as well. But I'm sure all of those issues aren't really issues because "it just takes faith". Which is to say "We haven't really worked out all the details, we're a little sketchy on some issues but you should just trust us! Call 1-800-giv-cash to have all your prayers answered!"

Once again it is arrogance that causes humans to believe they are the "chosen ones".
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

"Call 1-800-giv-cash to have all your prayers answered!"

HA HA! I wholeheartedly agree! These wolves in sheep's clothing you see on tv are actually a great example of the selfishness of egocentric humans. I have two songs on two different albums that I have produced that talk directly about these people.

Take care!

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

It would add to your credability (and the credability of your viewpoint) if you would answer questions without stupid quotes or website citations that aren't well researched. After all anyone can type in a few key words on a search engine and get some crack-smokers view that supports whatever your point of view is. For example:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/flaws.html

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/absurd.html

http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Mezzanine/1855/atheistbible.html

http://thetruth.hypermart.net/bible/Intro.htm

BTW: I really didn't read these much as you really didn't read the websites you posted.
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

" interesting beliefs, the "we're right, everyone else is wrong because the bible says so!" opinion."

Well..see..you are wrong on that one. My opinions and me communicating what I believe has nothing to do with " Us Christians are right and everyone else is wrong." That is a little presumptious to say. When it comes to Biblical discussions and opinions of a Biblical nature, God is the one right in any and all of this, not me or anyone else. My opinion means nothing as to whether or not God is just and Allmighty..He said He was in His word. There is nothing I can do in my power to make anyone believe anything. It is all from the power of His Spirit.

"As far as the "translation" of the bible into the different versions...this leads to many problems, people interpret the language in the bible differently. Thats why the catholics have a pope...he interprets the bible (apparently the pope is god's right hand guy)."

I don't think that he is God's right hand guy and that subject right there is a real good example of how horrendous religion is to begin with.

"Once again, just because some of the things in the bible may have happened (jesus lived) doesn't mean that all parts of the bible are true (jesus is still alive or rose from the dead). "

If we are supposed to be scientific in this discussion, what makes that statement scientific at all? In other words, you are being choosy as to what you are calling fact and what you are calling myth, even though it happened within the same time and pages of the same book. LOL!

"If you read the book of mormon, many of the things in that bible also happened (more recently I might add!) and many people believe it to be the "real word of god". I'm sure your (billy & giantsfan) opinion will differ but why do you think the book of mormon is NOT the real word of god? Because your bible says so?"

I have studied Mormonism very much and know quite a lot about it. Yes, people believe it to be the real word of god, but here is the difference between the god of the Bible and the god of mormonism:

The Bible says that there is only one God, Mormonism teaches that there are many and that men will become gods over their own planet when they reach godhood and will have celestial sex for all eternity with many wives, populating the planet with spirit children. Then, of course, this goes against Jesus being the one true God and God in the flesh.

There is so many more differences, but that is the one crucial point.

Take care!

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

Still boils down to one's interpretation of there unverified spirit being vs another's.

Now there is something that got a lot of people killed in the Inquisitions.

May as well fight over whose the better hero...Spider man or Batman.

All in all "Much ado about nothing..."

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

>>
>>"Once again, just because some of the things in the bible may have happened (jesus lived) doesn't mean that all parts of the bible are true (jesus is still alive or rose from the dead). "
>>
>>If we are supposed to be scientific in this discussion, what makes that statement scientific at all? In other words, you are being choosy as to what you are calling fact and what you are calling myth, even though it happened within the same time and pages of the same book. LOL! '

No he is being consistent. He accepts the bible is a compilation from many sources and origins. Evidence from external sources reveals the origins of the biblical stories.

>>The Bible says that there is only one God, Mormonism teaches that there are many and that men will become gods over their own planet when they reach godhood and will have celestial sex for all eternity with many wives, populating the planet with spirit children. Then, of course, this goes against Jesus being the one true God and God in the flesh.'

The bible actually says there are many gods and goes on to list them by name. I think the list is roughly 50-100 but I forget.
-----
CDieter
'Reason, observation, and experience; the holy trinity of science.'

"The bible actually says there are many gods and goes on to list them by name. I think the list is roughly 50-100 but I forget."

You gotta be kidding, right? My friend, please start reading the Bible for yourself, and you will see that there is no truth to that comment.

Take care!

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

Billy,

I'm not going to belabor this as I find religious discussions tedious and odious but seeing that I have had my schooling via baptist universities your suggestion that it is I who hasn't read and studied the bible is silly. My numbers I think were off but I was going from memory. You may consider them false Gods but to people at that time they were as real to them as our God is to us.

But since you make mention of it:
'Let's look at some of the Gods mentioned in the Bible:

Adrammelech II Kings 17:31 Sepharvite God.
Anammelech II Kings 17:31 Sepharvite God.
Ashima II Kings 17:30 Samaritan Moon Goddess.
Ashtoreth I Kings 11:05 Canaanite Goddess.
Baal I Kings 18:19 Canaanite God ("Lord" of
fertility, vegitation, and storms.
Baal-berith Judges 8:33 A regional variation/aspect of Baal.
Baal-peor Numbers 25:03 Moabite regional variation/aspect of
Baal.
Baal-zebub Luke 11:19 Philistine/Ekronian regional
variation/aspect of Baal.
Baalim I Kings 18:18 Canaanite Gods ("Lords", a
collective of the different
aspects of Baa.
Bel Isiah 46:01 Assyrian/Babylonian/Sumerian God
("Lord".
Chemosh I Kings 11:07 Moabite war God.
Dagon I Samuel 05:02 Philistine/Ekronian/Babylonian God
of agriculture.
Diana of the
Ephesians Acts 19:35 Ephesian moon and nature Goddess,
("Divine/Brilliant".
Jehovah Exodus 6:03 Hebrew God
Jupiter Acts 14:12 Roman God (possibly derived from
'Zeus-pater', Father Zeus).
Lucifer Isiah 14:12 ("Light-Bearer"
Mercurius Acts 14:12 Otherwise known as the Roman God
Mercury, God of communication and
travel, and messenger of the
Gods...which is probably why Paul
was called this at Lystra.
Milcom I Kings 11:05 Ammonite God
Molech I Kings 11:07 Ammonite God, also called Moloch,
most probably Baal-Hammon of
Carthage.
Nebo Isiah 46:01 Assyrian/Babylonian/Chaldean God of
wisdom and writing, also called
Nabu.
Nergal II Kings 17:30 Cuth/Assyrian/Babylonian war and
underworld God, also called
Meshlamthea.
Nibhaz II Kings 17:31 Avites God
Nisroch II Kings 19:37 Assyrian God
Rimmon II Kings 05:18 Babylonian/Syrian storm God
involved (as Ramman) with the
Deluge, according to Hebrew texts;
also known as Ramman/Rammon.
Succoth-benoth II Kings 17:30 Babylonian fertility Goddess ("She
Who Produces Seed", also known as
Zarpanitu/Zerpanitum.
Tammuz Ezekial 8:14 Assyrian/Babylonian God
Tartak II Kings 17:31 Avites God

happy holidays.
-----
CDieter
'Reason, observation, and experience; the holy trinity of science.'

I am actually familiar with those gods that you listed, as they are in the Bible, but not in there from the viewpoint as I thought you were coming from. I thought you were coming from a universalistic/plural god point of view with your comment. I do apoligize for that if that was not the case.

Yes, people did worship other gods, like those listed, but God Himself is the one true God and as He said, there are no other gods before Him.

Take care!

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

I thought you were coming from a universalistic/plural god point of view with your comment. I do apoligize for that if that was not the case.
>>
>>Yes, people did worship other gods, like those listed, but God Himself is the one true God and as He said, there are no other gods before Him.
>>

And that my friend is a matter of belief. For you and I.

Have a great holiday.
-----
CDieter
'Reason, observation, and experience; the holy trinity of science.'

1 Timothy 1:10 makes no mention of slave traders...

"10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;"
-----
www.hullabalooherps.com

In my opinion either of you is partly right and partly wrong.
The evolution does not contradict the existence of God in my eyes. The evolution was His tool to create.

I think it's kind of naive to imagine God as a David Copperfield who snap the fingers and there was light.
I reads in the Bible this way because the people then didn't know of evolution and would not have understood it.

We still are far away from knowing everything and I think in 1000 years (if mankind still exists then) they will regard us as primitives who hardly had a bit of a grasp.

Evolution doesn't mean chance. Evolution means selection.

And the existence of man is a matter of probability. With so much galaxies and solar systems (billions of it) somewhere HAS to be conditions that enabled the emergence of a race like the humans. And I am convinced that we are not the only one.

Does all of this contradict the existence of God? Does it mean there is no God since we can't prove His existence?
I don't think so.

Just as amoebas compared to human beings there is an excellent chance that an entity exists who makes us look like amoebas. The highest entity in all of the universes.
Just compare the possibilities of an amoeba to those of the humans and you will get a TINY grasp of the possibilities of God.
Such an entity of course don't must be imagined to live in a body.
God can't be proven, but he can be felt. And I have felt him many times especially when I was in trouble and misery where he never let me down when I have asked him for help.
You are right Frank, the Bible was written by man and surely minted by the personal intentions of the authors.

But I firmly believe that God has sent someone (His Son) in order to show us the way and to found this religion.
The word "son" is not to understand literally in my eyes, but only used because of the lack of a better word.

And Maries conception: I really don't care if it was the way the Bible reads. But I wouldn't exclude it because for an such an entity it should not be a problem who prompt the growing of a child in the uterus at will.

Sorry for the english, but I haven't had time to read it a second time and make corrections.

How can a man - who does not even know the secrets of his own mind possibly know that what has whispered to him is the voice of a God and not schitzophrenia?

H E I think it was more your own heart and mind that supported you in time of need.

Why is it the vanity of Man has such audacity to asume he is the ultimate life form in this universe? In that I agree H E.

Why is it the audacity of the Christain is so certain to think his vision of a God is the only truth?

I see no reason to believe that in the end there is more proof of one God's existence over another except that the dominant God's followers were adept at slaughtering those who did not agree.

I'm sorry, I look at a burning bush and wonder what the trick is...I do not grovel because I don't know the answer yet.

Is there such a thing as a God? I do not know. I am honest enough to say the question is unanswerable--YET.

All "proof" of a God exists in the writing of men. it is their credibility as witnesses that poises the question. Are they believable.

Since the rising of science, there have been fewer Gods and no new ones. Coincidence?

In the end as I said, it is a matter of conscience. We all look at the same world. We allevaluate according to who we are, what we know and what we believe.

At this juncture there is no proof of a God that will satisfy everyone's questions. Therefore it is as wrong to condemn Buddists, Hindu's Christains, Moslems, or any other religion--or even the lack of belief as each stands an equal chance of being right or wrong.

And it is just as wrong to hold any belief up and try to force it upon others as the only truth.

Which is the point of this whole debate.

Science belongs in schools where children learn to think. Religion belongs in churches and temples where children may go to find faith. Reason sits at home where these thoughts are turned into knowledge and morality.

It is wrong to impress either view upon children which in this country the Christians are trying hard to do.

I think to find an answer you have to see all the possibilities, but this does not include the poorly masked efforts of one religion to obscure our heritage in a makeshift contrived philosophy (intelligent design) that was only constructed when too many truths arose for the Christains to disprove.

I am older than most here. I have fought more battles on this subject than probably all of you. I have seen The churches embrace the existence of things which in my youth they denied.

It has taught me one thing. Everyone has an agenda. There should allways be doubt tempering any presented view of religion.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Frank, I agree with 90% of what you wrote. And I think we have a similar view of the Roman Catholic Church (a significant part of it consists of hypocrates).

I firmly believe that other branches of the Christian churches are not better. God is good and great, but the ground crew... oh my

I would consider myself as schizophrenic if I hear voices (or even the voice of God). But there are no voices in situations of utmost trouble that I have faced, but the feeling He is listening to my cry for help and - amazingly - help always came almost immediately.

Did it come from my heart as you say? Why not. I think that God is everywhere, thus He is also in me.

How come that some people believe in God and others are sceptic?
To find God it is necessary to look for him and to talk to him. You can't find someone by ignoring him.

What do you do when you are looking for someone? Right. You call for him.

I don't want to convice you Frank, but maybe you can give it a try when you feel like it.

Mostly we are calling for God in bad times. May such bad times never cross your way.

I wish you only good times for the rest of you life and if there are some particularly good moments perhaps you fancy to thank God for it. There is no harm in doing so but it can be the access to a different point of view.
-----
The #1 Boa constrictor site in the world wide web

Again with all due..

That's kind of putting the horse in front of the cart. Talking to someone you don't know exists, is like the child who talks to their imaginary friend. You end up creating a reality in your own mind that is irrelevant to the real world.

Are you familiar with the term "Self fulfilling Prophecy"?

Basically it is when you believe something intensly enough, it effects your behavior. The classic is you believe so much that you are going to fall that your nervousnes results in your slipping. It is easy to program the brain. Thus the belief that a God is watching over you - calms your thoughts so you can focus better on a problem. The belief is just that-a tool.

So sorry, but IMO that is what you have. Having a God to aid you works for you, because your mind has accepted the reality of it - reguardless of the truth of it. But truth be known, it would still work if you had the same conviction that Zeus, Allah, Buddah, etc...was the name you attached.

So no, I think I'll pass talking to beings I don't know are real.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Frank, I am familiar with the term self-fulfilling prophecy and all the literature about programming the brain in order to get the wanted results and so on. There is surely a point in this.

You are right, I talk to someone that I don't see. But every day you put the plug into the socket in order to switch on the coffee maker or the shaver. Have you ever seen electricity? I don't think so. You only see the results and you know how it works since our knowledge is advanced enough to understand it.

Several hundred years ago the people didn't understand electricity.

In my opinion we are not very much more developed since we left the caves and there is a huge amount in the nature that we will only understand in several thousand years. Just look at the possibilities of the quantum physics where we just have started to get a tiny grasp of it.

There are so many supernatural events (which are surely not supernatural, but we don't understand it up to now) that it is questionable to deny their existence just because we can't see or explain it. Do you agree?

I could tell you some events that can't be explained with our knowledge who happened after relatives died in my family .

What do you think about people who talk in foreign languages that they have never learned under hypnosis? Such things are proven, but how come?

In view of all this, I think denying Gods existence because one can't see him is not more reasonable than to believe in Him because one can feel His existence.
-----
The #1 Boa constrictor site in the world wide web

Unfortunately you chose a bad example. Electricity can be visabe (lightening, sparks) heard (thunder, crackling). It is measureable and physically felt.

Not the same thing at all.

Your right...we are not that far gone from the cave, so we blanket things we do not yet understand under the banners of Superstition or religion to keep us from trembling in our cave asking why?

As to the language thing...No I do not have a ready answer. Could be we are renecarnated who knows for sure.

But....Unexplained phenomina do not necessary stand as proof of a divine entity.

We do not know what death is...we guess at best.

For the record...I have never said there is no god. I say I don't know. And I certainly don't think if there is one that any Religion has the handle on the truth.

I tend to look at the point of the Goldfish in the bowl:

One says to the other, "If there is no God, then who changes the water?"

Should would who, or what ever changes our water really be considered a God?

That's why I think the Pagans have a better grasp than the Christians. At least they are pointing at our real master:

Nature.

The botom line is We do not know that there is or isn't a God. You have chosen to accept somethings as evidence that one does exist. That is your choice. I am not of the mind of praying to something I do not know exists. Now people tell me I should ignor what my experiences and senses tell me. That's not going to happen.

If I am wrong and I get hauled up to some Christian type Heaven then I will at least go and be damned as an honest man. Far better that then to be someone who "played the odds."

In the end I think we have only our sense of honor to determine who we are. To the best of my knowledge that is still MY choice.
I will not compromise it, for what appears to me as no more than Quackery.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

The example wasn't that bad because electricity can't be seen (it's the flow of free electrons). What you describe are the effects that electricity can cause.

To remain at the example I could say now that the miracles that have occured are the effect of God like a lightning is the effect of electricity.

I like your example with the gold fishes )

And, you are right: I also don't think that there is a church who can claim to have the only and right handle.
-----
The #1 Boa constrictor site in the world wide web

Touche' on the effect part. But electricity (as my point goes) is measureable and can be felt. It leaves physical evidence directly attributable to it.

Now I will presume you will say the same thing about a God but...that is evidence that we are debating (lol).

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

As to the example with electricity:

In Germany we have a saying for bad examples. It goes:

The example limps.

Confronted with such a reproach I normally reply: "And your example is in the wheel-chair" *LOL*

Have a good time, Frank!
-----
The #1 Boa constrictor site in the world wide web

(lol)
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Billy,

I've read a few of your posts and you sound like a nice fellow but you are seriously uneducated in this area. The fact that you think you can even engage in this debate in any way that is not supeficial is suprising.

Your entitled to your opinion but do realize it is an uninformed one:

>>I am just as alarmed as you are, but am alarmed that there are those who believe in the theory of evoloution that the world was formed by chance.'

Evolution says nothing about the formation of the world. Only how organisms change over time.

>>To me, it takes a lot more faith to believe in something like chance and that we as humans evolved.'

Again, it's not random or chance. Number two it doesn't require faith since we have evidence to support the theory.

' It was actually nature and the herps we all love and keep that actually helped me draw the conclusion of a holy and righteous God creating the heavens and the earth. My snake collections have always been a testimony to His awesome power and creative work.'

Thats fine, but the snakes where shaped by eons of evolution.

>>The Bible is historical and accurate historically. This is not my opinion but the opinion of theologans, scientists, archeologists, etc. '

You need to read more. This is simply a false statement.

' It is amazing how the prophecies of Christ in the Old Testament came to pass precisely. '

Of couse the book was edited and voted upon until it looked just so. The vote was close, 5 votes I believe. And still enough contradictions exist to have literally 10,000 sects and denominations.

' It is amazing how the earth is set in an area where if it moved closer to the sun, we would all burn, and if the earth moved away, we would all freeze. Was chance able to do that? I see no reason why that is even thinkable.'

This is reverse logic and naive.

>>Remember, this idea of creation is not an American idea, nor is God an American God. There are people all over the world that believe that God created the heavens and the earth. Does that make it true? Nope. Does what the church say make it true? Nope.'

Or is it more likely that we as a species evolve to seek group cohesion and generally accept the role of alpha leaders. The simple truth AND major flaw in your stance is that your religion chooses you based on the culture you live in 98% of the time.

'The evidence of a Creator God is very well apparent everywhere you look.'

That depends on perspective. Of course the world looks alot better today thanks to modern science.
-----
CDieter
'Reason, observation, and experience; the holy trinity of science.'

"I've read a few of your posts and you sound like a nice fellow but you are seriously uneducated in this area. The fact that you think you can even engage in this debate in any way that is not supeficial is suprising."

Wow, talk about a few comments about someone you have no clue about or know anything about. You have no idea of my education, and it is quite arrogant to say that you think I have no way to even be able to talk about this subject. Again...wow. It makes your whole post just about not worthy of responding to, but I can be " educated " enough to see past your rudeness. I forgive you my friend.

"Your entitled to your opinion but do realize it is an uninformed one"

And your opinion may be uninformed and bias as well.

" we have evidence to support the theory."

No, there is what is called supposed evidence. You were not here, nor was I when when the world was created, formed, etc. The next best thing we have to go with is history and study. A theory that was started in the 1800's is surprisingly looked upon as fact,..that does not dictate anything scientific.

"The Bible is historical and accurate historically. This is not my opinion but the opinion of theologans, scientists, archeologists, etc. '

You need to read more. This is simply a false statement. "

No, it is not a false statement and quite ludicrous that you would even suggest ME to read more. Go ahead and start talking to theologians, archeologists, etc. from all walks. It takes more than just reading, but interacting my friend.

"It is amazing how the earth is set in an area where if it moved closer to the sun, we would all burn, and if the earth moved away, we would all freeze. Was chance able to do that? I see no reason why that is even thinkable."
---This is reverse logic and naive. "

Nope...it is called common sense and logic. Could be scientific as well..ya think?

"The simple truth AND major flaw in your stance is that your religion chooses you based on the culture you live in 98% of the time. "

I do see what you are saying with this comment considering culture, but it is not true. Culture has and had nothing to do with me coming to know the Lord. The role of science actually had a lot to do with that my friend.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

>>Wow, talk about a few comments about someone you have no clue about or know anything about. You have no idea of my education, and it is quite arrogant to say that you think I have no way to even be able to talk about this subject. Again...wow. It makes your whole post just about not worthy of responding to, but I can be " educated " enough to see past your rudeness. I forgive you my friend.'

Thanks Billy, it's just hard to see how anyone can be 'educated' about evolution and make the statements you make. It's kinda like the guy who tries to tell his doctor how to do open heart surgery. It's actually quite arrogant to tell an evolutionary biologist who has spent his life advancing knowledge and the human race he is wrong or worse all the while using the advances his work has enabled for ones own benefit.

If you want to listen and learn, so be it. Ask good questions. But to be openly critical of something you clearly lack knowledge of simply is rather silly. There are times to teach and times to be a student.

The reason evolutionary biologists get so irritated by creationists has nothing to do with them being unsure of their data but rather frustrated by the close mindedness and arrogance of the uninformed individuals making the attacks.

>>
>>And your opinion may be uninformed and bias as well.
>>

Perhaps, but seeing how my opinion is based from working in the field and rests on proven and accepted science I think the likelyhood of me being correct is vastly superior to yours.

>>
>>No, there is what is called supposed evidence. You were not here, nor was I when when the world was created, formed, etc. The next best thing we have to go with is history and study.'

This is simply silly. So I guess you can never know who solved a crime unless your an eyewitness to said crime? We have plenty of 'study' and 'history' as well. Not to mention predictions based on the theory and experimental evidence that accompanis all the evidence from the last 175 years.

You should look at www.talkorigins.com or http://pharyngula.org/

each will further your education. Feel free to join in the comments over at pharyngula and learn from the replies.

'A theory that was started in the 1800's is surprisingly looked upon as fact,..that does not dictate anything scientific.'

Oh, so age of the theory somehow gives it merit? So I guess you don't accept germ theory since it came about after evolution theory. How about genetics? Later as well. Theories change as new evidence presents itself. The basic idea remains. You seem very confused about the nature of science itself.

>>
>>No, it is not a false statement and quite ludicrous that you would even suggest ME to read more. Go ahead and start talking to theologians, archeologists, etc. from all walks. It takes more than just reading, but interacting my friend.'

Again, after years of doing just that I can assure you that your stance is simply wrong. But that is not my point and frankly it's tiresome when reading virtually any book used in universities provides more than enough information.

>
>>
>>Nope...it is called common sense and logic. Could be scientific as well..ya think?'

The reason it's naive is that it starts with a presumption and goes from there, but I won't explain introductory logic to you on kingsnake.

>
>>I do see what you are saying with this comment considering culture, but it is not true. Culture has and had nothing to do with me coming to know the Lord. The role of science actually had a lot to do with that my friend.
>>

Oh, I'm sure your the 2% exception. Thats how discussions like this usually work. But alas religious discussions as mentioned are rather boring and exceptionally pointless.

Have a great holiday.
-----
CDieter
'Reason, observation, and experience; the holy trinity of science.'

"Thanks Billy, it's just hard to see how anyone can be 'educated' about evolution and make the statements you make. It's kinda like the guy who tries to tell his doctor how to do open heart surgery. It's actually quite arrogant to tell an evolutionary biologist who has spent his life advancing knowledge and the human race he is wrong or worse all the while using the advances his work has enabled for ones own benefit. "

Well, I do see what you are saying and where you are coming from. AND, in all this, my goal is not to say that YOU are wrong, as it is not my opinion here that really matters. God is right, not myself. Trust me, I do see where you are coming from.

"If you want to listen and learn, so be it. Ask good questions. But to be openly critical of something you clearly lack knowledge of simply is rather silly. There are times to teach and times to be a student. "

I do agree with your " times to teach " statement as well. One thing that led me to my opinion, or actually the major factor, was asking questions....questioning the reasoning and logic behind the theory of evolution is what led me to my opinions as well.

"The reason evolutionary biologists get so irritated by creationists has nothing to do with them being unsure of their data but rather frustrated by the close mindedness and arrogance of the uninformed individuals making the attacks. "

One thing you have to remember though is that someone disagreeing with you is not an attack, so there is nowhere in my posts that was attacking you or anyone, in case you were thinking that. If not, fine. I myself, may feel the same frustration of the close mindedness of evolutionists concerning the historical validity of the Bible and how it applies today. It it still a premature judgement to think that I am uneducated in this discussion simply because I may not agree with you. Like I have stated before, you do not know my education on this, and I have not doubted your education due to our difference in opinion.

We may just have to agree to disagree on this one my friend!

-----
Genesis 1:1

' God is right, not myself. Trust me, I do see where you are coming from.'

Your version of God. My version has no problem with evolution. You make the mistake of assuming yours is the correct version and hence argue from a 'I'm correct' stance. It's an arrogance to pesume to know more when in fact you don't.

Having said that I find you a likeable fella.

'was asking questions....questioning the reasoning and logic behind the theory of evolution is what led me to my opinions as well.'

Fair enough, but a study of the evidence shows it to be overwhelming. What you ignore is that you don't posit an answer for the evidence. You have to account for fossils, genetics, homology, and on and on. You have to aco[bleep] for what we see today. Attacking evolution is one thing, but it's a negative argument. You have to account for reams of evidence. Creationists have been trying for eons and come up empty.

Logic dictates life comes from life, and that is all evolution states.

>>One thing you have to remember though is that someone disagreeing with you is not an attack, so there is nowhere in my posts that was attacking you or anyone,'

It is when they don't have a legit alternative that answers the evidence and just attack a theory based on limited understanding.

'I myself, may feel the same frustration of the close mindedness of evolutionists concerning the historical validity of the Bible and how it applies today.'

You need to turn the mirror inwards here. It is not they who are being closeminded. But lets not go any further here.

' It it still a premature judgement to think that I am uneducated in this discussion simply because I may not agree with you. Like I have stated before, you do not know my education on this, and I have not doubted your education due to our difference in opinion.'

I doubted your education on this issue due to what you said. No one who correctly understands the theory would make such arguments. It's a tip of your hand. I was going by what you stated. That is appropriate to judge in this type of discussion.

If you say something, it is ignorant or wrong, it is ok to admit your not educated on this issue. It doesn't mean you lack education in general. Few are up to date in all fields. I wouldn't presume to tell my mechanic whats wrong with my car. He's the expert.

But for some reason people find it ok with this topic and then get upset when they are called uneducated.

>>
>>We may just have to agree to disagree on this one my friend!
>>

Yes we will. I'm done. Have a great holiday.
-----
CDieter
'Reason, observation, and experience; the holy trinity of science.'