UnderGround Forums
 

HolyGround >> Rogan going full retard on Noah's Ark


12/13/12 8:29 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 65
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? (Rom. 9:20)

Your religion that you will not stand before God who created you, and be held accountable for all the evil you have done in this life is frightening (Heb. 10:31).

You most certainly will (2 Cor. 5:10).

The fact that you don't approve of, believe in, or fully understand God who created you will not save you.

Only Jesus Christ can save you (Acts 4:12).

Don't listen to me, 'fundies,' or your own imagination, look to God, the Word (John 1:1).
12/15/12 11:36 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
they through his hat back in
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/3/12
Posts: 5
Have you only got one book in your library? I can send you a reading list if you wish?

Giving quotes from a book which was written decades after the events took place, from unsubstantiated sources, was translated twice before it was translated into English and has more contradictions than I can count on both hands, lends no credence to your arguments.

Please can you present facts that back up any your claims? Phone Post
12/15/12 12:58 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 66
I'm not making any claims.

I believe God (John 1:1, Rom. 4:3), whereas you believe you are a living god.

God is superior to his creation and is not confounded by time, language barriers, man, or anything else.

God says the Word was written by God through the hands of men (2 Pet. 1:21) and that every word is pure (Prov. 30:5-6).

I've read many books including the satanic quran, and as one would expect, they are all a joke compared to the perfect Word of God who created the heavens, the earth, and all that in them is.

If there is a God, and there must be, there is only one, one truth, one way.

Satanists always hope that by pointing to things in the Bible that their fallen, little minds can't fully reconcile or comprehend, or that doesn't tickle their wicked little ears, that that proves that everything accidentally created itself.

Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding? (Isa. 29:16)

God does not have to prove anything to his creation. God's existence is self evident, as is God's perfect Word in the Bible.

Everyone knows they have done wickedness in their lives. There is a judgment from God coming whether man likes it or not, and only Jesus Christ can save man from the penalty he deserves.
12/15/12 2:55 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
they through his hat back in
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/3/12
Posts: 6
I don't believe in any god so how I can believe I'm a living god is beyond me.

So God word is prefect? So do you believe in unicorns? Phone Post
1/21/13 6:07 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Imploze
108 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/11/11
Posts: 362
In to read later Phone Post
1/21/13 4:49 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 69
they through his hat back in -  I don't believe in any god so how I can believe I'm a living god is beyond me.

So God word is prefect? So do you believe in unicorns? Phone Post

Who is the god of your life? You are.

Who determines good and evil in your world? You do.

You believe you are a living god.

Sin does not exist except as defined by you in your own infinite wisdom as a self created living god who created himself and the universe...the only means by such wisdom could be had, and such self worship justified.



Joe Rogan takes psychedelic drugs and talks to Satan - http://youtu.be/O7A3SK5tnpQ
1/28/13 8:41 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Pokanghoya
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/22/06
Posts: 1835
This is a great troll.
1/30/13 10:57 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 70
^
says a guy who seriously believes he accidentally created himself from a soup of water and rocks billions of years ago
1/30/13 11:56 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Pokanghoya
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/22/06
Posts: 1836
Says a guy who believes The Bible.
2/1/13 12:44 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 71
^

says a guy who has no idea what the Bible actually says, but rather relies on what he is told about it by a stoned fleshlight peddler
2/2/13 12:19 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Trick or Truth
112 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/02/13 12:19 PM
Member Since: 12/24/10
Posts: 1557
I wouldn't bother posting to ridge hand, he is very clearly trolling either that or seriously deluded.
2/3/13 3:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 72
^
another self created living god shares his infinite wisdom with his creation
2/3/13 9:06 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
DyingBreed
16 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/18/03
Posts: 17602
Everyone has a measure of faith to come to God. I just wish I had a master key to awaken each... Phone Post
2/9/13 10:25 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
boooring
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/24/06
Posts: 2029
I wish more young earth creationists were better exegetes.

http://www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html

YEC's seem to breeze past the fact they are reading an English translation and approaching the text with thinking primarily formed by the Enlightenment.

YEC's create a unnecessary division in Christendom. Yes, YEC's is ONE way to read the creation account in an orthodox manner. However, it is not the only way nor the most exegetically honest.

Framework, check it out.
2/9/13 4:43 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 77
boooring - I wish more young earth creationists were better exegetes.

http://www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html

YEC's seem to breeze past the fact they are reading an English translation and approaching the text with thinking primarily formed by the Enlightenment.

YEC's create a unnecessary division in Christendom. Yes, YEC's is ONE way to read the creation account in an orthodox manner. However, it is not the only way nor the most exegetically honest.

Framework, check it out.

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division (Luke 12:51)

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (2 Pet. 1:20)

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day (Exod. 20:11)

Every word of God is pure (Prov. 30:5)

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Prov. 30:6)

all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. (Rev. 21:8)
2/10/13 2:48 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
bigsakimoto
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/10/13 6:58 AM
Member Since: 8/16/12
Posts: 247
"Joe also talks to aliens through psychedelic drug use: http://youtu.be/O7A3SK5tnpQ"

It seems this experience can be replicated by anyone who uses dmt in a sufficient dosage. Perhaps this is the same experience mystics around the globe, from all the major religions have experienced when they speak of "worlds within worlds" and the beings that occupy them. Or Joe may have found a way to lift the veil that keeps us humans from seeing Angels in our every day life. Whatever Joe saw it most certainly was divine.
2/10/13 1:12 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
boooring
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/24/06
Posts: 2030
ridge hand - 
boooring - I wish more young earth creationists were better exegetes.

http://www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html

YEC's seem to breeze past the fact they are reading an English translation and approaching the text with thinking primarily formed by the Enlightenment.

YEC's create a unnecessary division in Christendom. Yes, YEC's is ONE way to read the creation account in an orthodox manner. However, it is not the only way nor the most exegetically honest.

Framework, check it out.

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division (Luke 12:51)

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (2 Pet. 1:20)

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day (Exod. 20:11)

Every word of God is pure (Prov. 30:5)

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Prov. 30:6)

all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. (Rev. 21:8)

So you are saying you are using no interpretive method at all? What about language? Isn't that an interpretive method?

Do you think the Hebrews of the ancient near-east were reading an English translation and had a world view primarily formed by the Enlightenment?

A YEC attacking a person's salvation is par for the course though. Sigh...

2/10/13 1:46 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Trick or Truth
112 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/24/10
Posts: 1681
I don't like the fact you continually assert presupposed premises without any form of evidence.

"A complex creation must have a creator (Rom. 1:20)"

"God in the gaps" arguments holds no water with me nor anyone who values reasonable logical discourse, asserting that because something appears complex means that 'oh, God done' is in my mind, logically disingenuous.
The problem is that an extraordinary claim such as God, requires an extraordinary amount of evidence, as of yet no such evidence exists.
Citing an ancient book with numerable contradictions as 'evidence' again holds no water in rational reasonable debate. It is the same when religious people cite miracles from the bible as evidence, this quote perfectly encapsulates how I feel about such a stance--
"So you must ask yourself: is it more more likely that the laws of nature have been suspended in your favour or that you have made a mistake or that you are relying on extremely dubious sources?"

Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.
I chose to believe in something that can be tested and falsified. When someone can show me empirical evidence for the existence of a God then I would be happy to change my position.


2/10/13 2:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Trick or Truth
112 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/24/10
Posts: 1682
Caleb - 

Kent Hovind... that dude knows his stuff. You can youtube his name and find tons of debates. He is pretty amazing. 

 


Unfortunately I completely disagree, the man is a fraud and a liar (hence being jailed). I can cite many videos of him being dunked, or "debating" and avoiding the argument.

Here are some examples for you to dissect

Kent Hovind destroyed by Evolution Grad Student

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xleJhAvMjw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyHYQ8LRZ-M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Th_6ioq3wE

All the parts for this one are in the description-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfuhW7aa_eY


Here is someone going through his age of the earth argument and scientifically deconstructing some of his ridiculous young earth creationist claims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNZCcTcOPV0


Kent Hovind having a discussion with a real scientist -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIgWPwVfJX0


There are many many videos online of his claims being debunked by real scientists.

Now I don't expect you to watch them all my point is as follows, someone such as Hovind uses complicated nonsense to confused and proselytize people who do not understand the scientific principles he is misrepresenting.

Hopefully if you watch some of the videos it will clarify my original stance in regards how disingenuous he really is.




2/10/13 2:10 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
boooring
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/24/06
Posts: 2031
Trick or Truth - I don't like the fact you continually assert presupposed premises without any form of evidence.

"A complex creation must have a creator (Rom. 1:20)"

"God in the gaps" arguments holds no water with me nor anyone who values reasonable logical discourse, asserting that because something appears complex means that 'oh, God done' is in my mind, logically disingenuous.
The problem is that an extraordinary claim such as God, requires an extraordinary amount of evidence, as of yet no such evidence exists.
Citing an ancient book with numerable contradictions as 'evidence' again holds no water in rational reasonable debate. It is the same when religious people cite miracles from the bible as evidence, this quote perfectly encapsulates how I feel about such a stance--
"So you must ask yourself: is it more more likely that the laws of nature have been suspended in your favour or that you have made a mistake or that you are relying on extremely dubious sources?"

Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.
I chose to believe in something that can be tested and falsified. When someone can show me empirical evidence for the existence of a God then I would be happy to change my position.



What you are articulating is David Hume's famous argument against miracles - "exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence". That has been shown to be logically inconsistent for quite some time now.

Here's an article about the history of Hume's argument and the problems with it.

http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/miracles.html

As for the "God of the gaps" argument: it is only found compelling by those who conflate mechanism with agency.
2/10/13 2:16 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 79
boooring - 
ridge hand - 
boooring - I wish more young earth creationists were better exegetes.

http://www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html

YEC's seem to breeze past the fact they are reading an English translation and approaching the text with thinking primarily formed by the Enlightenment.

YEC's create a unnecessary division in Christendom. Yes, YEC's is ONE way to read the creation account in an orthodox manner. However, it is not the only way nor the most exegetically honest.

Framework, check it out.

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division (Luke 12:51)

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (2 Pet. 1:20)

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day (Exod. 20:11)

Every word of God is pure (Prov. 30:5)

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Prov. 30:6)

all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. (Rev. 21:8)

So you are saying you are using no interpretive method at all? What about language? Isn't that an interpretive method?

Do you think the Hebrews of the ancient near-east were reading an English translation and had a world view primarily formed by the Enlightenment?

A YEC attacking a person's salvation is par for the course though. Sigh...


The wicked get convicted by God, the Word (John 1:1), and front their problem with God onto those who preach God.

Every word of God is pure (Prov. 30:5)

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Pet. 1:21)

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isa. 45:7)

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Prov. 30:6)

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt (Ps. 14:1)
2/10/13 2:28 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ridge hand
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/14/12
Posts: 80
Trick or Truth - I don't like the fact you continually assert presupposed premises without any form of evidence.

"A complex creation must have a creator (Rom. 1:20)"

"God in the gaps" arguments holds no water with me nor anyone who values reasonable logical discourse, asserting that because something appears complex means that 'oh, God done' is in my mind, logically disingenuous.
The problem is that an extraordinary claim such as God, requires an extraordinary amount of evidence, as of yet no such evidence exists.
Citing an ancient book with numerable contradictions as 'evidence' again holds no water in rational reasonable debate. It is the same when religious people cite miracles from the bible as evidence, this quote perfectly encapsulates how I feel about such a stance--
"So you must ask yourself: is it more more likely that the laws of nature have been suspended in your favour or that you have made a mistake or that you are relying on extremely dubious sources?"

Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.
I chose to believe in something that can be tested and falsified. When someone can show me empirical evidence for the existence of a God then I would be happy to change my position.



That God created all is so obvious, that God correctly asserts that all are without excuse (Romans 1:20).

The exceptional, impossible claim (for which there is of course only evidence to the contrary) that everything accidentally created itself is fueled purely by the wicked desire to make good and evil subject to personal lusts, and to avoid accountability to God for anything.

As for ad hominem attacks by yourself (and those in the videos at the links you posted) on one of the great witnesses for Christ, Kent Hovind, God, the Word (John 1:1) tells us who is lying:

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? (1 John 2:22)
2/10/13 3:38 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
boooring
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/24/06
Posts: 2032
ridge hand - 
boooring - 
ridge hand - 
boooring - I wish more young earth creationists were better exegetes.

http://www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html

YEC's seem to breeze past the fact they are reading an English translation and approaching the text with thinking primarily formed by the Enlightenment.

YEC's create a unnecessary division in Christendom. Yes, YEC's is ONE way to read the creation account in an orthodox manner. However, it is not the only way nor the most exegetically honest.

Framework, check it out.

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division (Luke 12:51)

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (2 Pet. 1:20)

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day (Exod. 20:11)

Every word of God is pure (Prov. 30:5)

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Prov. 30:6)

all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. (Rev. 21:8)

So you are saying you are using no interpretive method at all? What about language? Isn't that an interpretive method?

Do you think the Hebrews of the ancient near-east were reading an English translation and had a world view primarily formed by the Enlightenment?

A YEC attacking a person's salvation is par for the course though. Sigh...


The wicked get convicted by God, the Word (John 1:1), and front their problem with God onto those who preach God.

Every word of God is pure (Prov. 30:5)

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Pet. 1:21)

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isa. 45:7)

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Prov. 30:6)

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt (Ps. 14:1)

Oh, you're a troll. Gotcha.
2/10/13 3:56 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Trick or Truth
112 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/24/10
Posts: 1684
boooring - 
Trick or Truth - I don't like the fact you continually assert presupposed premises without any form of evidence.

"A complex creation must have a creator (Rom. 1:20)"

"God in the gaps" arguments holds no water with me nor anyone who values reasonable logical discourse, asserting that because something appears complex means that 'oh, God done' is in my mind, logically disingenuous.
The problem is that an extraordinary claim such as God, requires an extraordinary amount of evidence, as of yet no such evidence exists.
Citing an ancient book with numerable contradictions as 'evidence' again holds no water in rational reasonable debate. It is the same when religious people cite miracles from the bible as evidence, this quote perfectly encapsulates how I feel about such a stance--
"So you must ask yourself: is it more more likely that the laws of nature have been suspended in your favour or that you have made a mistake or that you are relying on extremely dubious sources?"

Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.
I chose to believe in something that can be tested and falsified. When someone can show me empirical evidence for the existence of a God then I would be happy to change my position.



What you are articulating is David Hume's famous argument against miracles - "exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence". That has been shown to be logically inconsistent for quite some time now.

Here's an article about the history of Hume's argument and the problems with it.

http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/miracles.html

As for the "God of the gaps" argument: it is only found compelling by those who conflate mechanism with agency.

I cited the quote on the basis that ridge hand was using bible quotes as some kind of proof of a God and what I was trying to get across (perhaps you missed) is that arguing for proof of a God based on the bible does not in any way lend credence to the idea of God.
Even if you could prove that miracles exists (lets taken virgin birth as an example) that does not prove the existence of a God.
So my point was that logically speaking if you seen a man killed yesterday and then you seen him walking around today, would it be more likely to assume that the laws of nature were changed in order for him to live or that you perceived wrongly?

Anyway more to the point, funny you should use WLC to justify your stance. He is a sophist and a propagandist.
Let me take a quote from the source you cited as an argument against Humes argument against miracles.

"Christian thinkers presupposed the existence of God in their arguments. It was not a case of theism versus atheism, but of Christian theism versus Deism. In that sense they did not try to found a system of religion on miracles; rather they argued that given the existence of God, miracles are possible and that no a priori barrier exists to the discovery of actual miracles on the basis of historical testimony."

Now they suggest that Humes argument is not true based on the presupposition that God exists in their arguments and hence God suspends natural order for the miracles to occur. Now I am not going to disagree because assuming God is true then sure 'God did it' fits, unfortunately asserting that presupposition holds no water because they are not demonstrating proof of a God by merely asserting him as a possibility.
The whole Reductio argument is a false premise if ever I saw one. Its logically valid, but quite demonstrably wrong.
In fact Theologians (such as WLC) employ (although cleverly) a God in the gaps argument to lend credence to their arguments.

Let me take another quote from your source to back up what I am saying--

"Suppose that one attempts to rescue the notion of a 'violation' by introducing into the law certain ceteris paribus conditions, for example, that the law holds only if either (1) there are no other causally relevant natural forces interfering, or (2) there are no other causally relevant natural or supernatural forces interfering. Now clearly, (1) will not do the trick, for even if there were no natural forces interfering, the events predicted by the law might not occur because God would interfere. Hence, the alleged law, as a purportedly universal generalization, would not be true, and so a law of nature would not be violated should God interfere. But if, as (2) suggests, we include supernatural forces among the ceteris paribus conditions, it is equally impossible to violate the law. For now the statement of the law itself includes the condition that what the law predicts will occur only if God does not intervene, so that if he does the law is not violated. Hence, so long as natural laws are construed as universal generalizations about events, it is incoherent to speak of miracles as 'violations' of such laws."

Again if you dissect that statement they are asserting a presupposition for which they have no proof to validate the claim of miracles. Its quite a ridiculous stance to hold, but please I am very reasonable in such discussions and I am more then happy to discuss them with you at length, perhaps in your reply you could explain your stance so our discussion could be more coherent.

Just to clear one thing up about the possibility argument, as I stated in my original post--

"I chose to believe in something that can be tested and falsified. When someone can show me empirical evidence for the existence of a God then I would be happy to change my position."
So the philosophical approach by asserting a false premise does not sway me since they cannot demonstrate evidence for such a stance.
2/10/13 4:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Trick or Truth
112 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/24/10
Posts: 1685
ridge hand - 
Trick or Truth - I don't like the fact you continually assert presupposed premises without any form of evidence.

"A complex creation must have a creator (Rom. 1:20)"

"God in the gaps" arguments holds no water with me nor anyone who values reasonable logical discourse, asserting that because something appears complex means that 'oh, God done' is in my mind, logically disingenuous.
The problem is that an extraordinary claim such as God, requires an extraordinary amount of evidence, as of yet no such evidence exists.
Citing an ancient book with numerable contradictions as 'evidence' again holds no water in rational reasonable debate. It is the same when religious people cite miracles from the bible as evidence, this quote perfectly encapsulates how I feel about such a stance--
"So you must ask yourself: is it more more likely that the laws of nature have been suspended in your favour or that you have made a mistake or that you are relying on extremely dubious sources?"

Exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.
I chose to believe in something that can be tested and falsified. When someone can show me empirical evidence for the existence of a God then I would be happy to change my position.



That God created all is so obvious, that God correctly asserts that all are without excuse (Romans 1:20).

The exceptional, impossible claim (for which there is of course only evidence to the contrary) that everything accidentally created itself is fueled purely by the wicked desire to make good and evil subject to personal lusts, and to avoid accountability to God for anything.

As for ad hominem attacks by yourself (and those in the videos at the links you posted) on one of the great witnesses for Christ, Kent Hovind, God, the Word (John 1:1) tells us who is lying:

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? (1 John 2:22)

Lets try this one more time, give me some reasons as to why you think 'God created all is so obvious'?


Where was ad hominem used in my post?

I am pretty sure your reply will not be logical because I am certain that you are a troll but at least I tried.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.