Hold on, are you a myther when it comes to Jesus? I.e. you don't think Jesus ever existed as a person (not necessarily as God as most Christians believe)?
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How do you normally pay for purchases in stores?
'South Korea will remove evolution from its high school textbooks'
- Thread starter boramk
- Start date
porchrat
Honorary Master
What?
I just regard his story of being the son of a god and performing miracles and schit as no more or less credible than Greek mythology or the Norse pantheon... or any other myth for that matter.
Whether or not some mook named Jesus happened to exist is neither here nor there.
Regardless this has nothing to do with the thread so lets not derail it OK. You have already done that once with yet another fitness definition mess please don't do it twice in the same thread.
Just checking. There are some people who think Jesus did not even exist as a person.What?
I just regard his story of being the son of a god and performing miracles and schit as no more or less credible than Greek mythology or the Norse pantheon... or any other myth for that matter.
Whether or not some mook named Jesus happened to exist is neither here nor there.
Regardless this has nothing to do with the thread so lets not derail it OK. You have already done that once with yet another fitness definition mess please don't do it twice in the same thread.
Oh, you should be the last person to "lecture" others on derailing threads lol
. Btw, you moan about talk about the concept of fitness being discussed in a thread about evolution being taught in science classes. I think you would agree that you can't teach something if you don't have a proper definition for it or at least have a clue what the debate surrounding the definition is all about. Do you?
STS
Mafia Detective
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2009
- Messages
- 32,797
- Reaction score
- 2,943
technically Jesus is a myth, he was based on a real person however as i'm sure you wouldn't call Yeshua greek or someone capable of rising from the dead
Abiogenesis doesn't make that claim. Creationism does though.
The big bang itself doesn't claim the universe came from nothing. Science makes no statement on where the material originated.
porchrat
Honorary Master
Meh doesn't really matter to me whether some dude named Jesus happened to exist or not. Existing and being the son of a god are two entirely separate things.
That particular topic is not dealt with in high school science classes just as the species problem isn't. You know it and I know it. I know you get a stiffie just thinking about starting yet another debate on the definition fitness this week but I don't care, in this case it is irrelevant. Twice is more than enough for one week don't you think Phrones.Oh, you should be the last person to "lecture" others on derailing threads lol
As I recall we didn't know much, if anything, about how that worked when I was a child. Our inability to explain it was held up as an example of our magical origins.Yeah, it's strange...some people even think a person can form from a single cell in the space of a few months...
Preposterous
20 pages of thread posts and nothing much said...
I still don't understand why:
1. Evolution is pitted against religious ideas of creation.
2. Many people refuse to follow the theory of evolution's broad assertions. It is so beautifully logical and is backed by empirical evidence ranging over a wide spectrum of scientific fields.
3. Why religious apologists attack scientific endeavors attempting to understand and explain natural phenomena, when their real enemy should be other competing religious views. After all, only one religion can be right...
I still don't understand why:
1. Evolution is pitted against religious ideas of creation.
2. Many people refuse to follow the theory of evolution's broad assertions. It is so beautifully logical and is backed by empirical evidence ranging over a wide spectrum of scientific fields.
3. Why religious apologists attack scientific endeavors attempting to understand and explain natural phenomena, when their real enemy should be other competing religious views. After all, only one religion can be right...
Good post!
Geriatrix
Executive Member
1. The whole "man created in Gods image bit". No one wants a monkey god.
2. To many implications regarding creation myths. If you want to take them literal. And sooo much work.
3. That's not PC right now. Notice how none of the "teach both" crowd answer questions as to which religions should be taught with science. Guess why not. And besides, science is easy 'cause it's open to new new interpretation when new data is presented. They just fail to realise the data has to come from more than one source.
Last edited:
I am pretty sure they talk about natural selection. Fitness is relevant, you just don't want it to be.
Mike Hoxbig
Honorary Master
Geriatrix
Executive Member
You see!
Evidence right there!
The latest evidence suggests Velociraptor had feathers! Thus! Popol Vuh is plausable!
You know what's funny as well?
When the Big Bang Theory was first suggested the creationists rejoiced. Finally there was serious evidence for creation! But somewhere along the along the line the time scales became an issue and evil it became.
Last edited:
When did you post the post in the quote of the post I quoted?
Last edited:
Arthur
Honorary Master
Which will win out? Your inability to parse basic sentences is an embarrassment, no? To surf the evo wave you need to read better.
With foes like you, Americans can sleep without fear.
Already apologised for my mistake, and the OP also made it, you will see it's been edited to show South now. Dumb**** troll.