100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Community > Posts By > mykesorrel
|
|
|
Lol you're going into semantics, this i know, but for those who don't i'm glad you clarified.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thing ..we as humans and this extends to other species as well..are proof of evolution.... two beings have sex make one new being with both traits evolution proved... so which evolved first, the chicken or the egg Well, that is explained a lot, through a lot of mutations of course the chicken evolved from reptile type species with no fur. So if you want to know the question literally, then the egg obviously came first. Source : http://en.allexperts.com/q/Evolution-3839/2008/7/evolution-chicken.htm All of this i figured anyway (from what i read), but i think they lay it out more eloquently. @MsHarmony Do you know anything about evolution? I'm only asking not to discredit your knowledge if it is there, but if you don't know or understand what i mean by common ancestor, i believe that is a dead give away for me. Also, you said ID have not been disprove (which again you cannot disprove something that there is no evidence for), if you feel that way, why do you believe in ID (without the whole watchmaker talk/ KCA) that ID is more provable then anything outside it? @CowBoyGH I say this have everything to do with Jesus, because according to YEC, the earth is only 6000 years old more or less. If this is true, there is not enough time for evolution to occur, so that would negate the 600 years and show that we are not just a few generations from Adam and Eve. Thus, if Adam and Eve never existed (they bit the fruit), then original sin never existed. If original sin never existed, then he would've not died for our sins (there would be no reason to) and if he didn't the that would cancel out the tenets of Christianity. Scientists believe the world is 4.5 to 4.6 billion years old and have evidence to back such a claim. But besides, that. Even if Adam and Eve never existed, why does that make Jesus' death no different then any other? Jesus died for our sins, notice SINS not SIN. This includes but not limited to, one's daily activity throughout the day. Adam and Eve disobeyed God so they started "original sin", if they didn't start it, then the accounts for Genesis cannot be true. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I do feel I understand the english language fairly well. So I know what COMMON Means and ANCESTOR, and I can put the two together to come up with a fairly accurate definition of 'common ancestor'. Obama is said to have a COMMON ANCESTOR with other presidents. MEaning they are in some way both related to the same person somewhere down their genetic history. yes, I do know what evolution is,, in biology: 3. Biology a. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species. man has 'evolved' into several races through this process of 'evolution' biologically, although species and race can be interchanged or be totally different concepts depending upon the context of the conversation I believe in INTELLIGENT DESIGN, because I dont believe that the complex interdependence of living things or the complex system that runs the human body developed without any intelligence, or through a mere coincidence or accident,,,, K, so last part is Gods of the gaps, got the out the way. Secondly, when i said common ancestor i didn't mean the word literally of knowing the definition, i meant how it applies to evolution, exhibited in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSmTPThWD_c Also, i brought this up because i was watching a YouTube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2f_CZsXbyk&feature=player_detailpage#t=341s The above is a person who is a Christian who accepts it and knows it to be a fact (bravo for him), you can watch the whole thing if you want, i couldn't sit through it, the lack of knowledge is unbearable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thing ..we as humans and this extends to other species as well..are proof of evolution.... two beings have sex make one new being with both traits evolution proved... so which evolved first, the chicken or the egg Well, that is explained a lot, through a lot of mutations of course the chicken evolved from reptile type species with no fur. So if you want to know the question literally, then the egg obviously came first. Source : http://en.allexperts.com/q/Evolution-3839/2008/7/evolution-chicken.htm All of this i figured anyway (from what i read), but i think they lay it out more eloquently. @MsHarmony Do you know anything about evolution? I'm only asking not to discredit your knowledge if it is there, but if you don't know or understand what i mean by common ancestor, i believe that is a dead give away for me. Also, you said ID have not been disprove (which again you cannot disprove something that there is no evidence for), if you feel that way, why do you believe in ID (without the whole watchmaker talk/ KCA) that ID is more provable then anything outside it? @CowBoyGH I say this have everything to do with Jesus, because according to YEC, the earth is only 6000 years old more or less. If this is true, there is not enough time for evolution to occur, so that would negate the 600 years and show that we are not just a few generations from Adam and Eve. Thus, if Adam and Eve never existed (they bit the fruit), then original sin never existed. If original sin never existed, then he would've not died for our sins (there would be no reason to) and if he didn't the that would cancel out the tenets of Christianity. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it depends upon what 'evolution' is referring to,, what concept and what context I do believe we have 'evolved' or 'adapted' to our environments, I believe every living species had a capacity for adaptation to different envrionments at some level this doesnt negate the reality of adam and eve for me nor does it negate original sin,,, As evolution suggests we evolved from a common ancestor of the great apes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you don't accept evolution why is that?
Also, if you do, especially for a Christian how does that coincide with original sin (considering there would be no need for Adam and Eve)? Also that would dismantle the need for Jesus to die on the cross. Thanks for the responses to come. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God doesnt NEED Jesus to judge, anymore than my boss NEEDS me to run his copies its a responsibility delegated, not a necessity ,, in any case , this 'How could Jesus' justifiably refuse to endorse a sincere person? And why would he endorse an insincere person? ' ....was actually my point,, Jesus will see what God sees and vice versa we will first go through Jesus to get to God,, so if we have been refused by Jesus, we wont be able to go with God as far as endorsing a sincere person, it is my hope and belief that he will,, but mind you, those who SINCERELY dont approve of the God of the Bible, or the Jesus of the Bible,,,,,,would be refused on the bases of not being FORCED to live eternally with them and their (stupid, archaic, egotistic) values/rules ,,,that is, IF the Jesus and God of the Bible are exactly as it is written they are,,,, if they are first refused by me, why would they insist on forcing me to live eternally with them? ,,,,,that is my believe anyhow, Off-topic: What up with the multiple commas? I don't like to read words all crammed together with run on thoughts and indiscernable subject-verb agreement. My writing style in the forum reflects the way I prefer to READ things in this type of setting, with the use of EXTRA spacing to clearly seperate points. As for the commas, its my form of an ellipsis but the commas seem easier to make out than the dots. Uh, OK. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The Jesus Step
Edited by
mykesorrel
on
Wed 07/27/11 05:04 AM
|
|
Since everyone sharing something.
Kinda long i know Here's a poem i wrote :) : My letter to mankind We are human with characteristic of intelligence, charisma, problematic differences, indistinguishable love and evil. We share common traits, we have eyes, emotional smiles, flesh, blood, hearts, brains, lungs, the biology of our existence, the interchangeable fate of life and death, the conscience of great morality if we so see it. I am you, you are me, we are human, the tree of life, the pentacle of evolutionary champions, the height of love, the expression of art, the beauty of music, and the sanity of self-reflection to co-exist in a lonely universe. We go fourth in our endeavors, whether it be mother to child, child to mother, we love, we carry on for our future generation, negating any selfishness to deprive the future, we have to carry on, keep moving, motivating, and striving. We are strict in our cliché lifestyle that fits us, it’s who we are, and it’s who we’ve become. We’re born into a world, opening our eyes to new adventures, to a nurturing family, a sense of history, and a legacy of your own, as a human. We are love, the essence of its stronghold; we create rhythms, sounds, beats and harmonization of musical tones to express love through our instruments. We express it through kissing, sexual passion, holding, hugging, crying, marrying, and caring. We have our own self-reflection on what love it to us, we are all different but one in the same of expressing this emotional burden that hurts and pleases us. We are selfish in our own dehumanization of fellow humans; we’re racist, murderers, ignorant, fundamentalist, and proponents of nihilism. Where does our good morality begin, and where does it end? How many have to go hungry? How many have to suffer? Do you pray for a new Bentley, a new Christmas present, or for the children starving? Our selfishness perceives us. We’re all brothers and sisters in this lonely universe and we should stick together. We are believers and non-believers on a planet called earth, where everyone should be established on equilibrium. We’re Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Judaism, Deist, Agnostic, and Atheist yet we all share one thing, what is apparent to us - what we perceive life to be. The notion of our existence from our birth to death which does not allude us, we exist in this existence and should respect each other in this existence. We are Straight, Gay or lesbian who do not want to commit suicide because someone demonize our sexual representation that suits us, what if the world told you, you was wrong for being a heterosexual? They’re still human, flesh and blood, crying like me and you, lonely, depressed, deprived of acceptance, when does it end? Who are you to tell another to live their life? We are humans, an exponentially wise mammal, on the top of the kingdom, the power to destroy, and the power to create. We’re love, we’re evil, we’re selfish, and we’re what we make this world to be. This is our earth, our children, our brethren; let’s carry on, because we’re humane. Yes, it's long so what. :) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God doesnt NEED Jesus to judge, anymore than my boss NEEDS me to run his copies its a responsibility delegated, not a necessity ,, in any case , this 'How could Jesus' justifiably refuse to endorse a sincere person? And why would he endorse an insincere person? ' ....was actually my point,, Jesus will see what God sees and vice versa we will first go through Jesus to get to God,, so if we have been refused by Jesus, we wont be able to go with God as far as endorsing a sincere person, it is my hope and belief that he will,, but mind you, those who SINCERELY dont approve of the God of the Bible, or the Jesus of the Bible,,,,,,would be refused on the bases of not being FORCED to live eternally with them and their (stupid, archaic, egotistic) values/rules ,,,that is, IF the Jesus and God of the Bible are exactly as it is written they are,,,, if they are first refused by me, why would they insist on forcing me to live eternally with them? ,,,,,that is my believe anyhow, Off-topic: What up with the multiple commas? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Genesis 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. well another day over with and still no signs of Jesus 
This is interesting, i keep up with this thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
What is Faith?
|
I lol'd pretty hard, thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Our Statistics
|
|
I've gone back 60 days to get a feel for the tone of this section. Reason being, I've heard some say it's not about the bible or Christianity in particular. Proving or disproving the bible or Christian seems to be on everyones mind here according to my findings so far. 94 percent of the threads here have involve part of the crowd being for the bible/Christianity or against it. The results are overwhelmingly in favor that the bible and Christianity are the two most popular subjects on our minds. goes to show that statistics are meaningless. "proving or disproving the bible" is most definatley NOT on EVERYBODY'S mind here no matter what your findings say so far. i've never broached the subject of the bible or christianity and i most certainly have never tried to prove or disprove the garbage. i think no differently about christianity than any other religious dogma. that the majority of americans are christian and the majority of topics raised here on a dating site in america are about christianity and the bible simply makes sense. if you were to continue your 'researcg' i'm sure you'd find that the majority of places people gather to worship in america involve christians and the bible too. were we in saudi arabia my guess would be that you'd have a difficult time finding a forum where christianity was the dominant topic. but i'd be there too offering my thoughts on islam just as i do here on christianity. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
What is Faith?
|
|
I already know you don't like Christians and that's no biggie to me.
Do Christians really think a lot of atheists or others hate them? I'm an atheist as I'm sure most of your know and I don't hate Christians, in fact I'm very involved with one now (we been through or differences phase and I still respect and like her) . I don't hate Christians, I just don't like Christianity, Islam or any organized religion that promotes hate. Religion should only be about love and to self. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Rise of atheism.
|
|
Atheism is silly and an impossible argument. You can't prove there is no God - no one can so it is a pointless fantasy. Still don't get it. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i thought the poster wrote: Disclaimer: This don't need to evolve into a debate, more so stories on the path you took to your conclusion.
so i guess we should talk about what debate means? it started off good, then went left field. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
science is not out to prove anything as true. They instantly recognize the outrageous absurdities in these fables. And they don't even bother coming to their defense by claiming that they are merely stories of parables to make moral points. They just dismiss them as being obviously false. This is beyond me. It's like, it is impossible for modern culture to regard their religion as such. One civilization religion in their time, is the next generation entertainment. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Rise of atheism.
|
|
YES!
I am calm, i just felt like i asked the same thing in three different ways for you to reply in a more elaborated manner. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Rise of atheism.
|
|
mike, you really do seem to have a problem comprehending what i write. nowhere did i even come close to suggesting that there's any evidence for creation much less the "large amount" of which you speak. there are large amounts of evidence that suggests the big bang is a plausible alternative to creationism
^ This is what i'm talking about since i have to be more direct. and where in what you're talking about do you find mention of 'large amounts of evidence' for creation??? wtf in your quote you said there is large amounts of evidence that suggests the big bang is a alternative to creationism! How did you come to this conclusion and on what evidence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Rise of atheism.
|
|
mike, you really do seem to have a problem comprehending what i write. nowhere did i even come close to suggesting that there's any evidence for creation much less the "large amount" of which you speak. there are large amounts of evidence that suggests the big bang is a plausible alternative to creationism
^ This is what i'm talking about since i have to be more direct. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Rise of atheism.
|
|
sure, no real scientest would make such a claim but a strong atheist claims that there is no god at all, which makes him/her every bit as delusional, according to psychiatry, as a christian who claims god created everything. Really? Really? A person not believing into something because there is absolutely no evidence is delusional, wow. not what i said. i said that a person who CLAIMS that there is no god is delusional just as a person who CLAIMS there is a god is delusional. never said a person who doesn't believe there is a god because there is no evidence is delusional. that person is a weak atheist and does not CLAIM it to be fact as a strong atheist would. I believe there are no pegasi on the face of the planet Earth. There is no evidence of any pegasus anywhere other than ancient myths. Does that make me delusional? If not, why should the argument be any different concerning God? because your pegasi is not at alternative ods as god is. and you threw in that 'there is no evidence of any pegasus anywhere' suggesting that to be the reason you DON'T believe the creatures are on the face of the earth. your NOT BELIEVING there are pegasi on earth is not saying you BELIEVE IT TO BE FACT that there are no pdtasi. thee psychiatry diagnosis of delusional is one who believes in a concept in spite of large amounts of evidence for an alternative concept. there are large amounts of evidence that suggests the big bang is a plausible alternative to creationism so to believe creation to be fact is believing somehting supported by no evidence in spite of an alternative explaination such as the big bang with much evidence. for an atheist to say that he believes it to be a fact that there is no god is likewise delusional. to prove that fact he'd have to prove the big bang theory or some alternative theory. of course stephen hawkings says often that a theory can never be proved so that point is moot. Citation please for the large amount of evidence for creationism, no sarcasm, i really would like to see. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
