billydee4

Check this out: http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2007/08...in_congress.php

Wouldn't it be a better sign of Intelligent Design if all fingerprints were identical?

Bryan said: Sure does. It takes it out of the real of Hebrew grammar and into the realm of laymen doing their analysis based on English translations instead of the original languages. Bryan, the people who made the translations were experts in Hebrew grammar. I'm sure the hundreds of people who worked on the various versions of the Bible knew a little more than you do.

I actually went to a couple of fundie websites for the information. You always have a comment that you think is funny that isn't but you never address any issues presented.

Bryan said: Were you also aware that the Hebrew in chapter 2 allows for past tense (rendered in the NIV, for example, "had formed")? 19 Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air I checked thirty versions of the bible. In 25 of them the past tense "formed' or "made" is used. In one of them, Young's Literal Translation, the present tense "formeth" is used. One of them, the Douay-Rheims Version, has "having formed". Three of them read "had formed". The three are the NIV, the English Standard Version, and the God's Word Translation. All three were put together by biblical literalist fundamentalists to try to cover up the inconsistency. The 25 versions with "formed" are: New Living Translation New Revised Standard Revised Standard KJV Holman Christian Standard Third Millenium Bible New American Standard Bible New King James Bible The Good News Bible New Century Version World English Bible The Message The Complete Jewish Bible The Bible in Basic English The Darby Translation Hebrew Names Version The Webster Bible New International Reader's Version New Oxford Bible Holy Bible from the Ancient Eastern Text Amplified Bible Basic English Bible Jewish Old Testament New Jerusalem Bible New American Bible So you are going to go with the 10% that agree with you and ignore the 83% you disagree with? One of my favorite old "Peanuts" cartoons shows Lucy explaining to her brother Linus that the object they were looking at on the sidewalk was a rare albino monarch butterfly. She explained in arduous detail how every year they migrate from the tip of South America to wherever they lived. Charlie Brown comes along and says, "Lucy, that's a potato chip." Lucy repies, "How did a potato chip get here from South America?" Can someone else explain that story to Bryan before he wastes time figuring a way a potato chip can fly all the way from Patagonia to America?

What records? Could you cite them, please? Also, that is one out of 12. What about the rest of them? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Mark founded what's now known as the Coptic Christian Church in Egypt; Andrew founded what's now known as the Eastern Orthodox Church in then "Byzantium"; Peter founded the Christian Church of Rome in the 1st Century: As to the 9 others (or, uh, 8 if you discount Judas Iscariot), there is no evidence that they founded a church that is the antecedent of any church in existence today. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sorry, your saying it is so does not make it so. Can you give any hard facts instead of legends?

The dogma of the immaculate conception is non-biblical. It was later theologians who decided that sexual desire (conscupiscence) is sinful. That's how "adam's sin" or original sin is passed on. They figured that Mary had to be a pure vessel, so she could not have been concieved in sin, so they developed the doctrine of the IC. It was not made dogma (something roman catholics had to believe) until the middle of the 19th century. This was later "confirmed" a little French girl who saw the BVM in a garbage dump. It is celebrated on Dec 8. This dogma is related to the dogma of the Assumption of Mary. Since she was without sin, according to the pope, her body did not corrupt after her death. It went directly to heaven, skipping the worms and bugs. As a kid I thought the Feast of the Assumption came about when theologians asked where she was and the answer was "I assume she's in heaven." That is not the case. This was made dogma in the middle of the 20th century. It is celebrated on Aug 15. Protestants and Orthodox, in general, do not believe the two dogmas.

The immaculate conception was all about Mary. Since she was the "vessel" to bear the messiah (this was before people knew of the existence of human ova--before that they thought semen was actual seed and the womb was like a fertile garden) she had to be pure. In order to make that happen she had to be conceived without sin. Apparenty, according to this theory, the act leading to conception, i.e., regular, natural heterosexual sex, was in itself sinful. God prevented original sin (Adam's disobedience) from staining her. The conception of Jesus by the holy spirit (the bird) planting a divine seed in her fertile garden without having to do the nasty. The Roman Catholic church goes even further by saying that she remained a virgin after the birth of JC and stayed a virgin for the rest of her life. Why she was condemned to be a virgin forever is a mystery. Jesus's brothers and sisters mentioned in the bible were, according to RC theology, either the offspring of Joseph by a previous marriage or the cousins of Jesus. The geneaologies of Jesus in the bible are just too confusing to merit any real consideration.

The stories that some churches were founded directly by apostles are based on almost 2000 year old myths. There is no evidence for this. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Except for the historical records of the "first" Bishop of Rome from the year 30 A.D. to 67 A.D. who was known as "Peter". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What records? Could you cite them, please? Also, that is one out of 12. What about the rest of them?

2dumb2Btakenseriously So you think that god sits around thinking up new fingerprint and iris patterns? Does he do the same for crystals? There is no way to prove that no two sets of fingerprints or irises were identical. Identical twins, triplets, etc., all have the same DNA. The fact that the magnitude of this baffles you is no surprise. "God did it" is not a scientific defense. It is the refuge of the unimaginitive and uninformed.

You're exaggerating because you're in denial that the leading Christian scholar is also an evolutionist. The Pope said that only those Churches directly founded by Jesus' Apostles are true churches (that would man Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and perhaps Coptic Christian). Others he said are also important: "These separated churches and communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives that fullness of grace and truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church." There are many who disagree with the Pope. But to joke about drinking wine when Benedict has a Ph.D. in theology from a prominent German University and was a professor for many years is really a cheap shot. How many Churches actually say that all religious faiths are equal? I doubt that even the Dalai Lama would go along with that. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The stories that some churches were founded directly by apostles are based on almost 2000 year old myths. There is no evidence for this.

For latecomers, we've already been over this. http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...009entry60009 Obviously you got here late. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't patronize me, dick. I've been here all along. I registered and dropped the name bewildered, since it seemed to amuse you so much. So tell, me when do the words "property", "possession", and "inheritance" don't mean "property", "possession", and "inheritance"? Most of us dropped the excuse, "because I said so" by the time we were three.

It's abundantly clear to everyone who doesn't have his eyes closed and his fingers in his ears. I'm reading a book called Baptized in Blood: The Religion of the Lost Cause, 1965-1920 by Charles Reagan Wilson (history prof, U. of Mississippi, 1980), which traces the history of pro-slavery belief in the American South to the Bible, and the Confederate culture that has remained with us from those roots to this day. It's still not uncommon to hear rednecks say things like "if only the South had won the Civil War," and invariably these people are politically and religiously "conserative" if you can call that kind of radicalism conservative. There's no denying this point, except of course in the minds of those who can deny anything. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The most satisfaction I get about hearing from Bryan that his god might have know what the word for a concept was he certaily did not convey the word to Barney or Fred who was taking his dictation. Just because god told them some group of people were property didn't really mean they were, like, propery. Just because I said rabbits eat their cud, doesn't really mean they eat anyone's cud

The foreign slaves were treated differently than the Hebrew slaves, but it doesn't follow that they were property (other than their labor being owned by the master). You might be convinced of what? If you'll be convinced of something I'd like to know what it is before I try to hunt up the source that is supposed to convince you. Promises, promises. You mean I can't win unless you concede? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Exodus 21:20-21 When a slaveowner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner's property Leviticus 25:44-46 As for the male and female slaves you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. You may also acquire them from the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. You maky keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property. These you may treat as slaves, but as for your fellow Israelites, no one shall rule over the other with harshenss. Honestly, dick, can it be any clearer?

It looks like I've one. It's been 10 days and Bryan has yet to answer. Dick

"..Iraq poised to achieve a constitutiona republic"? Someone's been watching Faux News too much. What evidence is there that Iraq is poised to do anything except get more Iraqis and more Americans killed? So far Iraq has failed to meet 10 our of 18 benchmarks. That's progress? Dick

I didn't ask about Paul's "take" on anything. I asked about the lies you said he has told. If you can't answer the question with concrete examples, then you are the liar.

Being called a "dick" doesn't qualify as a serious critique, BTW. It wasn't meant as a critique. It was a descriptive word that sooooo fits you. Being a dick is, unfortunately, incurable.

Can you tell us what Matt's ongoing antics were? Even if Matt were a mass murderer or delusional or an addict it still would not excuse what Paszkiewicz did.

Can you give any examples of lies that Paul has told in the past?