Religion Debates and Discussions

If you need some sources, go watch Mark Dice on YouTube.

 

why am I here

 

If you're using bias to discredit most of science, I think I can safely use bias to discredit this.

Good question

 

god now I'm getting alerts for this why did I comment

 

I just responded to this point a few posts ago:

 

Well yeah, they had to have children with each other. It can be said He literally sat down with them and talked to them. But does it say so in the Bible? Are all sins OK if people claim God said they were OK? Can a guy commit murder but it's not a sin because he claims God sat him down and told him he could do it? You used to talk about sins as absolutes, now you're getting very loosey-goosey with the rules.

OK, firstly...

Gravity: Complex physics (not apparent, not discovered until 1600s)
Gravity's effects: Things fall (very apparent, discovered like always)
Evolution: Complex biology (not apparent, not discovered until 1800s)
Evolution's effects: The way humans and all animals are today (apparent, discovered like always)

You're trying to conflate the EFFECTS of gravity with the SCIENCE of evolution. The effects of gravity are obvious and we've always known them. We just didn't know how it worked. The effects of evolution are obvious and we've always known them. We just didn't know why things were how they were. You see how similar the two are?

Secondly, you can't rebut things based on levels of obviousness.. Ever heard of evidence?

I'm sure you'd know a lot about not letting blacks vote, being from North Carolina

And honestly I don't think it would ever work, not letting people like you vote. But if I had a magic wand with which I could change democracy to make it work better, that would be something I would do. People can't control being black or being women, you can control your complete and utter willful ignorance. If you have no interest in the actual truth, only your personal truth, and you don't accept that evidence is needed to prove things, if you live your life based on the big man in the sky, then you are mentally unfit to participate in democracy. That's what I think.

 

Grouping all religious people into the category of religious people I would call fairly extreme is almost as offensive as saying that religious people shouldn't vote. Globalist is saying that those individuals who choose to ignore evidence shouldn't vote. I know plenty of Christians who love science, and think about what they learn and come to their own conclusions about things. These people I'm sure he'd be fine with.

 

I'm pretty sure the ones who are as crazy as you are more like 10-20% and many of them don't live in democracies anyway. I have no problem with religious people voting, merely people who have no interest in reality. Like you.

yeah this^^

 

I mean, if over a third of Americans thought the earth was flat then I reckon the other two-thirds would be pretty concerned. The actual shape of the earth isn't all that important in our day-to-day lives but if over a third of the US was so blatantly wrong about something, that would be a bit worrying. And how we came to exist is far more important than the shape of the earth tbh.

You see what I'm getting at? Just the fact that so many Americans are so horrendously wrong about something that is so central to our very existence makes me think it's worth debating.

 

I agree. I think that it's a bit sad in a way that so many people either don't care to think about where life originated, or don't care about it at all. In my opinion, big questions like that are important to think about, regardless of the conclusion, for people to help mature their minds.

 

ur so smart

 

I think it's interesting that no matter who or how many people debate this there won't ever, at least for now, be a solid answer. If Atheists are correct and there is no God or Heaven then they will simply be dead, no "I told you so"'s to be uttered. And if Christians are right and there is a God and there is a Heaven then there will be no gloating because they are in heaven and past disputes become irrelevant.

 

he is indeed trolling bretheren

 

I agree with this. It's a whole separate debate to ask if we should even bother debating about this, because everyone that knows the answer is dead, and the only way to know the answer, at least for now, is to die.

 

That's probably the most biased source you could've cited. He's also a Buffoon.

 

Not just that, but any conservative news source will tell you that all those media outlets are fake news.