Over 160 Professors Refuse to Debate Creationist!

[kebotDiNaMute]

---

mao gitawag ug fact kay naay mga factual evidence.

is fact = truth?


Bulahan ang nitu-o nga wala makakita..

Creationist man diay ka brad. POSITIVE KAAU TINOBAGAN... hahaha

[kebotDiNaMute]

a dinosaur fossil is an enuf evidence .

now , whats ur evidence that genesis creation happen ? dont say the bible nsad .

ng paka uwaw man lng sa iq ang mga mga creationist.

hehehe, if so, dili na unta theory si evolution. But sadly you guys have the faith looking at the opposite direction.

[botslob]

From fellow creationists:

The CMI article written by Carl Wieland and Jonathan Sarfati stated that the claims made by Hovind are "fraudulent" and contain "mistakes in facts and logic which do the creationist cause no good."

Grabiha diay aning Hovind no kay fraudulent man diay ni iyahang mga claims hihihihi

[regnauld]

Lets just clarify the God that i worship and the God that you mean. You move into a more technical detail where in the situation can be solved via simple analogy.

My God created Everything...

Your god is what?

point is, we have a totally different god... don't justify your god as the same as mine because they arent... Keep thinking.. i love it.

You did not answer my question master kebot. Again this is my question: "Where do you think is the KINGDOM OF GOD?"

[kebotDiNaMute]

You did not answer my question master kebot. Again this is my question: "Where do you think is the KINGDOM OF GOD?"

Dont ask questions to something you dont want to know... you wont believe it either... google it brad, they are precise on what book and what chapter... state your purpose and lets talk about it... don't ask a question like this.. lets move on to a more productive not personal...

[jamesmusslewhite]

Come to think of it. Scientists are CRITICAL THINKERS while believers only rely on FAITH which is sometimes BLIND according to Albert Einstein and Francis BAcon. We need a lot of EVIDENCE to PROVE that what the bible is saying is Literally true because if not, then the bible is just full of SYMBOLISM and nothing else! That is CRITICAL THINKING at its best bro!

No offense for you as a bible believer!

Albert Einstein believed in Jesus


Jesus

Jesus

The following comes from "What Life Means to Einstein: An Interview by George Sylvester Viereck,"The Saturday Evening Post, Oct. 26, 1929, p. 17. The questions are posed by Viereck; the reply to each is by Einstein. Since the interview was conducted in Berlin and both Viereck and Einstein had German as their mother tongue, the interview was likely conducted in German and then translated into English by Viereck.
Some portions of this interview might seem questionable, but this portion of the interview was explicitly confirmed by Einstein. When asked about a clipping from a magazine article (likely the Saturday Evening Post) reporting Einstein's comments on Christianity taken down by Viereck, Einstein carefully read the clipping and replied, "That is what I believe." See Brian pp. 277 - 278.
"To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?"
"As a child, I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene."
"Have you read Emil Ludwig's book on Jesus?
"Emil Ludwig's Jesus," replied Einstein, "is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot."
"You accept the historical existence of Jesus?"
"Unquestionably. No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life. How different, for instance, is the impression which we receive from an account of legendary heroes of antiquity like Theseus. Theseus and other heroes of his type lack the authentic vitality of Jesus."
"Ludwig Lewisohn, in one of his recent books, claims that many of the sayings of Jesus paraphrase the sayings of other prophets."
"No man," Einstein replied, "can deny the fact that Jesus existed, nor that his sayings are beautiful. Even if some them have been said before, no one has expressed them so divinely as he."





Francis Bacon's view of Atheism
Francis Bacon

OF ATHEISM I had rather believe all the fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind. And therefore, God never wrought miracle, to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it. It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion. For while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity. Nay, even that school which is most accused of atheism doth most demonstrate religion; that is, the school of Leucippus and Democritus and Epicurus. For it is a thousand times more credible, that four mutable elements, and one immutable fifth essence, duly and eternally placed, need no God, than that an army of infinite small portions, or seeds unplaced, should have produced this order and beauty, without a divine marshal. The Scripture saith, The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God: it is not said, The fool hath thought in his heart; so as he rather saith it, by rote to himself, as that he would have, than that he can thoroughly believe it, or be persuaded of it. For none deny, there is a God, but those, for whom it maketh that there were no God. It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man, than by this; that atheists will ever be talking of that their opinion, as if they fainted in it, within themselves, and would be glad to be strengthened, by the consent of others. Nay more, you shall have atheists strive to get disciples, as it fareth with other sects. And, which is most of all, you shall have of them, that will suffer for atheism, and not recant; whereas if they did truly think, that there were no such thing as God, why should they trouble themselves? Epicurus is charged, that he did but dissemble for his credit's sake, when he affirmed there were blessed natures, but such as enjoyed themselves, without having respect to the government of the world. Wherein they say he did temporize; though in secret, he thought there was no God. But certainly he is traduced; for his words are noble and divine: Non deos vulgi negare profanum; sed vulgi opiniones diis applicare profanum. Plato could have said no more. And although he had the confidence, to deny the administration, he had not the power, to deny the nature. The Indians of the West, have names for their particular gods, though they have no name for God: as if the heathens should have had the names Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, etc., but not the word Deus; which shows that even those barbarous people have the notion, though they have not the latitude and extent of it. So that against atheists, the very savages take part, with the very subtlest philosophers. The contemplative atheist is rare: a Diagoras, a Bion, a Lucian perhaps, and some others; and yet they seem to be more than they are; for that all that impugn a received religion, or superstition, are by the adverse part branded with the name of atheists. But the great atheists, indeed are hypocrites; which are ever handling holy things, but without feeling; so as they must needs be cauterized in the end. The causes of atheism are: divisions in religion, if they be many; for any one main division, addeth zeal to both sides; but many divisions introduce atheism. Another is, scandal of priests; when it is come to that which St. Bernard saith: Non est jam dicere, ut populus sic sacerdos; quia nec sic populus ut sacerdos. A third is, custom of profane scoffing in holy matters; which doth, by little and little, deface the reverence of religion. And lastly, learned times, specially with peace and prosperity; for troubles and adversities do more bow men's minds to religion. They that deny a God, destroy man's nobility; for certainly man is of kin to the beasts, by his body; and, if he be not of kin to God, by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature. It destroys likewise magnanimity, and the raising of human nature; for take an example of a dog, and mark what a generosity and courage he will put on, when he finds himself maintained by a man; who to him is instead of a God, or melior natura; which courage is manifestly such, as that creature, without that confidence of a better nature than his own, could never attain. So man, when he resteth and assureth himself, upon divine protection and favor, gathered a force and faith, which human nature in itself could not obtain. Therefore, as atheism is in all respects hateful, so in this, that it depriveth human nature of the means to exalt itself, above human frailty. As it is in particular persons, so it is in nations. Never was there such a state for magnanimity as Rome. Of this state hear what Cicero saith: Quam volumus licet, patres conscripti, nos amemus, tamen nec numero Hispanos, nec robore Gallos, nec calliditate Poenos, nec artibus Græcos, nec denique hoc ipso hujus gentis et terræ domestico nativoque sensu Italos ipsos et Latinos; sed pietate, ad religione, atque hac una sapientia, quod deorum immortalium numine omnia regi gubernarique perspeximus, omnes gentes nationesque superavimus.




No offense for you must not be a bible believer! That is CRITICAL THINKING at its best bro!
So they was foolish too, just like me, to bad they was not as smart as you.
Because these were their very spoken words or pen by their own hand, not someone else views on the subject..............................Facts

[regnauld]

Dont ask questions to something you dont want to know... you wont believe it either... google it brad, they are precise on what book and what chapter... state your purpose and lets talk about it... don't ask a question like this.. lets move on to a more productive not personal...

Why are you evading my question? Jesus even asked this question and you cannot even answer this? So, let me ask you again. Where is The Kingdom of GOD?

BTW this is not personalan master kebot.

[kebotDiNaMute]

From fellow creationists:

The CMI article written by Carl Wieland and Jonathan Sarfati stated that the claims made by Hovind are "fraudulent" and contain "mistakes in facts and logic which do the creationist cause no good."

Grabiha diay aning Hovind no kay fraudulent man diay ni iyahang mga claims hihihihi

Maintaining Creationist Integrity (response to Kent Hovind)
@Bots you watch n learn, from my little understanding...

The link above is an interview with hovind.

background: They talked about the HOVIND THEORY. (as i told you before, you better examine his claim... but dont get excited...)

[KENT H]: … or that there ever was ever a super continent called Pangea.

[CMI]: Does it matter what the name is? Some creationists who like Catastrophic Plate Tectonics call it Pangea, but that does not mean that it is the mythical Pangea of evolutionary history, hundreds of millions of years ago.

KENT HOVIND - stand to belief a Young EARTH.
CMI - stand to support Creation, and Evolution.

Now if you also believe in CMI, that Means you also believe in CREATION... RIGHT? to me it doesn't matter, Its the creator that counts. So if CMI said its fraud, they are talking about the content in the BIBLE. You can read the whole conversation to see for yourself.

Hovind's theory is his personal opinion, based on the Biblical account and... A theory remains a theory if not proven CORRECT? CMI demands why did hovind use this information when they are not proven TRUE? Just because of this CMI label it as "FRAUD".

Also scientist will always disagree with each other... ITS NOTHING SPECIAL, he is wrong, because the other is RIGHT. So this becomes a healthy CREATION SCIENCE.


Trying hard to remove creationism? dont get excited... what you are agreeing are the comments of those creationist... so you agree with creationism now? Great...

By the way if you want to see Hovind loose his composure check out:

YOUTUBE: hovind vs ross

I love it...

[kebotDiNaMute]

Why are you evading my question? Jesus even asked this question and you cannot even answer this? So, let me ask you again. Where is The Kingdom of GOD?

BTW this is not personalan master kebot.

Why are you evading my question?
--- am i on trial? well we can always choose to answer we like. Don't force me unsa ni communista? I just forsee you are preparing something... Bring it on and quit fooling around.

[kebotDiNaMute]

Albert Einstein believed in Jesus


Jesus

Jesus

The following comes from "What Life Means to Einstein: An Interview by George Sylvester Viereck,"The Saturday Evening Post, Oct. 26, 1929, p. 17. The questions are posed by Viereck; the reply to each is by Einstein. Since the interview was conducted in Berlin and both Viereck and Einstein had German as their mother tongue, the interview was likely conducted in German and then translated into English by Viereck.
Some portions of this interview might seem questionable, but this portion of the interview was explicitly confirmed by Einstein. When asked about a clipping from a magazine article (likely the Saturday Evening Post) reporting Einstein's comments on Christianity taken down by Viereck, Einstein carefully read the clipping and replied, "That is what I believe." See Brian pp. 277 - 278.
"To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?"
"As a child, I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene."
"Have you read Emil Ludwig's book on Jesus?
"Emil Ludwig's Jesus," replied Einstein, "is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot."
"You accept the historical existence of Jesus?"
"Unquestionably. No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life. How different, for instance, is the impression which we receive from an account of legendary heroes of antiquity like Theseus. Theseus and other heroes of his type lack the authentic vitality of Jesus."
"Ludwig Lewisohn, in one of his recent books, claims that many of the sayings of Jesus paraphrase the sayings of other prophets."
"No man," Einstein replied, "can deny the fact that Jesus existed, nor that his sayings are beautiful. Even if some them have been said before, no one has expressed them so divinely as he."

No offense for he as a bible believer! That is CRITICAL THINKING at its best bro!
So he was foolish too, to bad he was not as smart as you.

He is the man seeking how god thinks... (referring to universe)
--- quantum mechanics