Quote:
Originally Posted by RainmanTrail
Perhaps I should bow to your wisdom. Such elegant thought provoking responses.
your sarcasm only further shows your inability to see your own ignorance. like i said, if you want to discuss the historicity of the resurrection, start a thread.
Quote:
By your train of "wrong" statements, we can conclude that mankind (and suggestively you in particular) is fully capable of understanding and explaining the science behind how someone is raised from the dead 3 days after they've died. We can also gather that mankind is able to duplicate this event (I await your evidence of this). Pretty remarkable statements. One word answers seem rather insufficient for such bold claims.
again, you are missing the point. It is depressing that i have to explain this to you like a child, but I will since you are new here:
Your claim:
"The most difficult aspect regarding the resurrection of Jesus is that it's an account of a supernatural event which none of us have ever witnessed anything similar to."
My response:
"wrong"
Let's see if we can figure out what is "wrong" about your claim. You make a couple of statements:
1. Resurrection of Jesus is an account of a
supernatural event.
2. Its a
supernatural event which no one has ever witnessed anything similar to.
3. Its the most difficult aspect of the resurrection.
If you can't see how any, if not all, of your points are just flat our wrong, then theres very little I can do to help you.
Quote:
Next point... I never claimed to be a creationist. I also never claimed to not "understand" the theory of evolution. I simply stated that we (as in scientists) can not yet recreate or duplicate the most fundamental building blocks of evolution. We can not turn a fish into a lizard through a series of forced mutations and it's not because we haven't tried. We also can not recreate a living cell in the lab without proteins and amino acids. I have no clue what your scientific background is nor do I know how much you know about our current understanding of the cell. You should read up on it. There have been some incredible discoveries within the last twenty years.
No one said you were a creationist. All i said is that your understanding of evolution appears to be built solely on creationist propaganda. Saying things like "We can not turn a fish into a lizard through a series of forced mutations", only furthers your demonstration of this ignorance.
Quote:
Regarding your attack against my *ability* to grasp scientific principles, I assure you that this will not be an issue in our discussion.
agreed, which is why i said let's not hijack this thread. any continued defense by you in your claim to understand evolution will only further embarrass you. Try not to be so closed minded and accept that you have some learning to do, and drop this topic.
Quote:
Regarding your attack against my *closed mindedness* regarding evolution, again you fail. I am completely open to any and all ideas.
well good, then start learning more than what your creationist friends have told you.
Quote:
I have shifted and reshaped my beliefs more times than I can count. I even once believed that God created the earth some 6,000 years ago. I no longer believe that. I use to believe that God sent people to Hell who didn't believe in him. Again, I no longer believe that. Claiming I am closed minded is well... let's just say closed minded.
oh wow good for you. Again, I will quote myself:
"my advise to you is try not to be "closed minded" towards evolution, and learn a little bit"
Did i say you were closed minded? No, I said try not to be closed minded towards evolution, and try to learn a bit before making unsubstantiated claims regarding it. Learning to read and understand what people write will go a long ways in making your time here more enjoyable.
That said, we all eagerly await your thread discussing why the resurrection is the "most historically reliable account of anything ever written about the life of Jesus".