Celtic Heroes

I would also like to address the whole debate on how right or wrong the actions of the christian God are.

This is a very common topic of discussion where people who allegedly don't believe in God pick at his actions and the Christians try to justify them. Pardon me for saying this but: you do realize that that is completely irrelevant to whether God actually exists or not, don't you?

Honestly, hate to burst your bubbles, but just because you don't like the way someone does things, does not make them not exist. I really hate Hitler but I don't think he isn't real because I don't like what he did. That is a terrible argument and if you don't believe in God I would honestly expect you to come up with something better. To me it looks more like you do believe in God and are just mad at him.

If you don't believe in God, you have no right to judge his actions.

Sorry if that little rant offended you.

I'm not religious myself but, the way I see it: if God really does exist and created everything, he can do whatever the heck he wants and guess what? None of us have any right to judge his actions. If he really did create everything then he created right and wrong and therefore defines right. So either you believe in God, in which case: saying he did something wrong makes you vain and arrogant, or you don't believe in God, in which case: what is it to you?

i understand and agree with this to a degree, i do not believe in god, and people who do believe in god are not my issue. my issue is with the faith itself, and having faith in a deity/set of laws which are so very controversial and the only "proof" of which comes from humans

Most faiths are controversial, evolution is controversial. Pretty much everything you have learned in your life comes from humans, you are a human. Why so against Christianity?

This topic has had its ups and downs but recently its degraded into what most online discussions on religion do: a bunch of butt hurt atheists hating on Christianity. I just don't see how this topic is staying positive.

Evolution is only controversial in the bible belt USA among the uneducated and the scientifically challenged.

The evidence from fossils all having related lineages, to being deposited in the right areas and layers to be consistent, to the DNA and mitochondrial DNA linking all life including plants and bacteria into one giant tree of life is not only incontrovertible but the basis of medical science that has already brought far greater lifespans and health than any religion.

I mean ffs you can watch it happen in the lab with short reproduction time organisms like bacteria. It's the reason why vaccines are losing thier effectiveness.

Im really sorry that your religious beliefs aren't true. I'm not insulted but quite saddened actually. You really need to learn what is real before reality catches up with you - it is completely uncaring and unforgiving.

Evolution is only controversial in the bible belt USA among the uneducated and the scientifically challenged.

The evidence from fossils all having related lineages, to being deposited in the right areas and layers to be consistent, to the DNA and mitochondrial DNA linking all life including plants and bacteria into one giant tree of life is not only incontrovertible but the basis of medical science that has already brought far greater lifespans and health than any religion.

I mean ffs you can watch it happen in the lab with short reproduction time organisms like bacteria. It's the reason why vaccines are losing thier effectiveness.

Im really sorry that your religious beliefs aren't true. I'm not insulted but quite saddened actually. You really need to learn what us real before reality catches up with you - it is completely uncaring and unforgiving.

1. I already stated I am not religious.
2. I have already refuted your above arguments in previous posts and my posts have not been addressed. Address my previous posts first, I hate repeating myself.
3. There are plenty of educated people who do not trust in macroevolution, you just think otherwise because it is taught in public schools.
4. Stop trying to use microevolution to prove macroevolution.

mis worded, i meant word of mouth, no actual proof to back the existence of a god or truth in all religious texts

There may or may not be proof for religious texts but please address the arguments I posted above where I presented the logical conclusion that a god exists before you start saying there is no god. If you can refute my arguments I am happy to learn, but if you are just saying things without backing them because you have a personal issue with religion, please tell me now so I stop wasting time reading your posts.

Religion is formed from stories versus science which is formed from... theories? If this is the argument, you must validate yourself based on an outside source.

Do not support Christianity with the bible and do not support theories by repeating it or adding more theories.

That means you are left with logic:
We do not know how the universe came to be, we can only guess.
There are written documents which mention names and dates. Whilst a large portion may be inaccurate, it is reasonable to assume that some things must be true. After all, every lie (not that any religion is a lie) is built on a kernel of truth.
We can not see god, feel god (physically touch), hear god, etc.
We can not go back in time to verify theories such as the Big Bang or evolution over a long term.

With that in mind, you can still live. We can still laugh, have fun, investigate life, maintain faith, open up to new ideas, stick with traditional ideas, etc etc etc.

From what I have seen from many religions, there is a large amount of free-will and forgiveness. You do not have to %100 take a side in a war that does not even exist.

Atheists had good lives, Christians had good lives, Hindus had good lives, etc. Everything comes with time and for right now, what we do not know about these subjects can not hurt us.

Religion is formed from stories versus science which is formed from... theories? If this is the argument, you must validate yourself based on an outside source.

Do not support Christianity with the bible and do not support theories by repeating it or adding more theories.

That means you are left with logic:
We do not know how the universe came to be, we can only guess.
There are written documents which mention names and dates. Whilst a large portion may be inaccurate, it is reasonable to assume that some things must be true. After all, every lie (not that any religion is a lie) is built on a kernel of truth.
We can not see god, feel god (physically touch), hear god, etc.
We can not go back in time to verify theories such as the Big Bang or evolution over a long term.

With that in mind, you can still live. We can still laugh, have fun, investigate life, maintain faith, open up to new ideas, stick with traditional ideas, etc etc etc.

From what I have seen from many religions, there is a large amount of free-will and forgiveness. You do not have to %100 take a side in a war that does not even exist.

Atheists had good lives, Christians had good lives, Hindus had good lives, etc. Everything comes with time and for right now, what we do not know about these subjects can not hurt us.

There is some merit of truth in what you say, I was much happier just following what I was raised to believe, I often regret knowing what I know. But humans are curious and have to keep learning.

I do not agree with the religion vs science deal. I do not see why people seem to assume that you can't trust science and have a religion at the same time. This seems incredibly silly, religion does not have to affect your trust in any science and visa versa.

Evolution is only controversial in the bible belt USA among the uneducated and the scientifically challenged.

The evidence from fossils all having related lineages, to being deposited in the right areas and layers to be consistent, to the DNA and mitochondrial DNA linking all life including plants and bacteria into one giant tree of life is not only incontrovertible but the basis of medical science that has already brought far greater lifespans and health than any religion.

I mean ffs you can watch it happen in the lab with short reproduction time organisms like bacteria. It's the reason why vaccines are losing thier effectiveness.

Im really sorry that your religious beliefs aren't true. I'm not insulted but quite saddened actually. You really need to learn what us real before reality catches up with you - it is completely uncaring and unforgiving.

1. I already stated I am not religious.
2. I have already refuted your above arguments in previous posts and my posts have not been addressed. Address my previous posts first, I hate repeating myself.
3. There are plenty of educated people who do not trust in macroevolution, you just think otherwise because it is taught in public schools.
4. Stop trying to use microevolution to prove macroevolution.

You are not religious but do not 'believe' in evolution????

You refuted nothing with facts. Every comment I made has huge mountains of very very obvious evidence anyone with intellectual honesty and an Internet connection can access.

There is no difference between 'micro' and 'macro' evolution. Though those are apologist terms not scientific ones. The only difference is time.

There are virtually no educated people who "do not trust in macro evolution" that do not have an agenda - typically some fundamentalist religious slant.

There is a reason why it is taught in schools. Christians just hate evolution because it is 'proof' genesis is false and therefore no original sin so no need for Jesus to kill himself and the whole thing falls apart. You don't question gravity, quantum mechanics or any other science taught in schools with the exception of the science that disproves the earth is 4000 years old.

You know in Europe it is a serious crime to deny the holocaust. It isn't opinion and it's just so unbelievably in denial of reality and hurtful to people it is a crime.

What we need in America is a law that makes it a serious crime to deny reality in the face of overwhelming incontrovertible evidence. I think that this would help clear up quite a few problems.

I do not believe you are not religious. You are definately entrenched in the dogma of the deep south bible belt science denial. You think the thoughts and use the terms. You ignore the same evidence. If you are honestly not I suggest a good therapist. Because if you really don't know what is real on that level you are a danger to yourself and others.

Religion is formed from stories versus science which is formed from... theories? If this is the argument, you must validate yourself based on an outside source.

Do not support Christianity with the bible and do not support theories by repeating it or adding more theories.

That means you are left with logic:
We do not know how the universe came to be, we can only guess.
There are written documents which mention names and dates. Whilst a large portion may be inaccurate, it is reasonable to assume that some things must be true. After all, every lie (not that any religion is a lie) is built on a kernel of truth.
We can not see god, feel god (physically touch), hear god, etc.
We can not go back in time to verify theories such as the Big Bang or evolution over a long term.

With that in mind, you can still live. We can still laugh, have fun, investigate life, maintain faith, open up to new ideas, stick with traditional ideas, etc etc etc.

From what I have seen from many religions, there is a large amount of free-will and forgiveness. You do not have to %100 take a side in a war that does not even exist.

Atheists had good lives, Christians had good lives, Hindus had good lives, etc. Everything comes with time and for right now, what we do not know about these subjects can not hurt us.

You aren't quite up on how science works so rather than assume you are obtuse I'll explain.

Evidence about the world in some form is recorded as data. This needs to be repeatable and testable. That data then forms a basis for guessing what mathematical and logical relationship it has so as to predict future data. This is called a hypothesis. More data is gathered and more independent testing is done. When mountains of new data, preferably captured in new ways and outside the initial scope of the investigation fails to disprove the hypothesis - that is it explains all data and is able to predict new data in novel circumstances then it becomes a theory.

If new testable data comes along and is outside current hypothesis or theory they are modified to accomidate the new data. Thus science helplessly clings to facts and is taken wherever the facts lead.

So a scientific theory often has hundreds to thousands of human lifetimes of careful data collection behind it with 100% of the evidence supporting it and 0% falling outside it. This is pretty much the opposite of laypersons understanding theory as a wild fkn guess that no one knows if it is real.

The difference between science and religion is religion is made up out of the blue. Everyone has a different view no ones facts line up. Every believer just knows thier right and everyone else is wrong. There can be no changes made based on evidence.

Science is so entrenched in reality that even aliens that evolved on another planet - complete with no resemblance to life on earth - would develop independently the SAME SCIENTIFIC THEORIES. Even if it was done a billion light years away and a billion years ago. Why? Because science is reality based, we all live in the same reality, we will all measure similar data. So the hypothesis that make it to theory will be mathematically equivalent. The entire world - and if we ever meet aliens the entire universe will agree on nearly every last little detail.

You can't even get two Catholics to agree. And I can guarentee that if in the extreme unlikely event aliens ever visit earth they will have only heard of Jesus or human gods through our radio broadcasts.

There is no Christian science, no American science, no Muslim science, no Japanese science, no human science and no alien science. There is only science. Pretty much the definition of what is real falls under the eventual domain of science as our ability to wield it increases.

See the difference?

Its just sad to see these people talking about god like this, he will come one day and will take his followers and take them to his kingdom were they will live for iternity in peace with him, but for the others that never believed or appreciated that he died for us in the cross, those will burn in hades\hell for iternity and will cry for gods hand but he will turn their back on them like they did to him and they will be saying sorry but it will be too late. Amen. Keep calm god is coming soon. Dont hate on this pls this is just the truth the real truth, the devil created those homosapians and those monkeys just to lie to us that gid didnt create anything, but he will burn in the lake of fire with all his demons and the people who gave their back on god will join him for eternity, its time to face reality people. Amen.

Its just sad to see these people talking about god like this, he will come one day and will take his followers and take them to his kingdom were they will live for iternity in peace with him, but for the others that never believed or appreciated that he died for us in the cross, those will burn in hades\hell for iternity and will cry for gods hand but he will turn their back on them like they did to him and they will be saying sorry but it will be too late. Amen. Keep calm god is coming soon. Dont hate on this pls this is just the truth the real truth, the devil created those homosapians and those monkeys just to lie to us that gid didnt create anything, but he will burn in the lake of fire with all his demons and the people who gave their back on god will join him for eternity, its time to face reality people. Amen.

So the dinosaurs were put here by satan to deceive us from the true path of god.

Are you an American living in the centeral southern to south east part of the country? I'm not looking to bust anyone I'm just taking a survey.

It's nice now people make brand new trolling accounts just for this thread.

Religion is formed from stories versus science which is formed from... theories? If this is the argument, you must validate yourself based on an outside source.

Do not support Christianity with the bible and do not support theories by repeating it or adding more theories.

That means you are left with logic:
We do not know how the universe came to be, we can only guess.
There are written documents which mention names and dates. Whilst a large portion may be inaccurate, it is reasonable to assume that some things must be true. After all, every lie (not that any religion is a lie) is built on a kernel of truth.
We can not see god, feel god (physically touch), hear god, etc.
We can not go back in time to verify theories such as the Big Bang or evolution over a long term.

With that in mind, you can still live. We can still laugh, have fun, investigate life, maintain faith, open up to new ideas, stick with traditional ideas, etc etc etc.

From what I have seen from many religions, there is a large amount of free-will and forgiveness. You do not have to %100 take a side in a war that does not even exist.

Atheists had good lives, Christians had good lives, Hindus had good lives, etc. Everything comes with time and for right now, what we do not know about these subjects can not hurt us.

You aren't quite up on how science works so rather than assume you are obtuse I'll explain.

Evidence about the world in some form is recorded as data. This needs to be repeatable and testable. That data then forms a basis for guessing what mathematical and logical relationship it has so as to predict future data. This is called a hypothesis. More data is gathered and more independent testing is done. When mountains of new data, preferably captured in new ways and outside the initial scope of the investigation fails to disprove the hypothesis - that is it explains all data and is able to predict new data in novel circumstances then it becomes a theory.

If new testable data comes along and is outside current hypothesis or theory they are modified to accomidate the new data. Thus science helplessly clings to facts and is taken wherever the facts lead.

So a scientific theory often has hundreds to thousands of human lifetimes of careful data collection behind it with 100% of the evidence supporting it and 0% falling outside it. This is pretty much the opposite of laypersons understanding theory as a wild fkn guess that no one knows if it is real.

The difference between science and religion is religion is made up out of the blue. Everyone has a different view no ones facts line up. Every believer just knows thier right and everyone else is wrong. There can be no changes made based on evidence.

Science is so entrenched in reality that even aliens that evolved on another planet - complete with no resemblance to life on earth - would develop independently the SAME SCIENTIFIC THEORIES. Even if it was done a billion light years away and a billion years ago. Why? Because science is reality based, we all live in the same reality, we will all measure similar data. So the hypothesis that make it to theory will be mathematically equivalent. The entire world - and if we ever meet aliens the entire universe will agree on nearly every last little detail.

You can't even get two Catholics to agree. And I can guarentee that if in the extreme unlikely event aliens ever visit earth they will have only heard of Jesus or human gods through our radio broadcasts.

There is no Christian science, no American science, no Muslim science, no Japanese science, no human science and no alien science. There is only science. Pretty much the definition of what is real falls under the eventual domain of science as our ability to wield it increases.

See the difference?

I hate reply to long posts with a short one, but your arguments are so one sided. You are saying there is absolutely no flaws with science, though we Christians and others who do not believe in the Big Bang Theory are providing a counterexample to every one of your arguments, yet you make more and more and, of course, you have to throw in a comment trying to explain how 'deranged' we are. EdElric came up with an excellent argument to prove your incredibly false claims and annoyingly false percentages. Also, religion is not based on guesses. We have historical evidence backing our claims - the Bible. There is also much historical evidence that has been found. What you are also saying is that there is no argument in science. What about spontaneous generation? What about the extinction of dinosaurs? There are also many flaws in your theory. Why did the particle explosion that supposedly created the earth create two different genders - and with the correct genetalia to reproduce? Why is water the only substance that in its liquid physical state it is more dense than its solid state? If it wasn't, we would not be alive. Did a particle smaller than the tip of a needle plan all of this?