Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noahs
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
€œdays€� are figurative of long ages, then so are the €œevenings€� and the
€œmornings.€� But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/

On 05/28/2017 12:28 AM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Sun 28 May 2017 12:09:16a, Bod told us...


Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict
the time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the
order of creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of
events in the evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For
example, the Bible says the earth was created before light and
before the sun and stars, just the opposite of the big-bang
theory. The Bible says that fruit trees were created before any
sea creatures and that birds were created before dinosaurs (which
were made on day 6, since they are land animals), exactly the
opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that initially
the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then
with the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis
says the earth was completely covered with water for two days and
then dry land appeared. According to evolution, the earth has
never been covered with a global ocean. But according to the Bible
the earth has been completely covered with water twice: the first
two days of creation and Noah€„¢s Flood. It is impossible to
harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology or the evolutionary
story of earth€„¢s development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding
millions of years to the days or between the days relates to the
order. If the €œdays€� are figurative of long ages, then so are
the €œevenings€� and the €œmornings.€� But how could plants
survive millions of years of darkness? Or how could they reproduce
if they had to wait hundreds of millions of years before insects
and animals were created that would pollinate the plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...d-eve/when-was
-adam-created/


I can't say that I don't belive in God, and I have read every word of
the Bible more than once. However, I have always found it hard to
rationalize the creation theory in Genesis when compared to what
appears to be evolutionary fact.


Hi Wayne,

Genesis was always meant to be a story, not scientific fact.
It was to displace the notion that clouds in the sky were
the flatulence of gods riding over the skies in chariots,
etc, etc etc.. These were acts of nature, not gods.

And Bod is glossing over just how close Saint Moses got to
what we actually think happened. Darwin probably got
his idea on evolution from Saint Moses from the fish
coming on land and developing feet.

And Genesis was despised by the pagan of that time
as well, not just Bob and others of our time.

And evolution was never meant to be anything other than
science and as such is a moving target. 200 years from
today, there will be a theory to replace it and everyone
will laugh at evolution just as today we laugh at "caloric" and
the "first law of thermodynamics" (matter and energy can
neither be created or destroyed -- obviously not true).

Keep in mind what the saints say about science: Seek ye not
the truth in science, as today's truth are always tomorrows
falsehoods. But rather seek the truth in Jesus Christ, who
is the way, the truth, and the light.

As the Bible says:

And he hath given men skill, that he might be honoured
in his marvellous works.
-- Wisdom of Sirach (Apocrypha), chapter 38, v6, KJV:

When you learn about scientific discoveries, think Glory
Be To God for all his marvellous works. And the fact that
despite his creation being beyond our limited capacity
to comprehend, he still love us each individually and call
us to a personal relationship with him

Bod is trolling and acting like a jerk in the process.
The idea is to be inflammatory to keep the conversation
going as long as possible. And the weird part is that he
doesn't need to. He is a interesting guy all on his own
without being a jerk.

Yours in Christ,
-Todd

I would love to see the speed of light broken. I do believe
that ever since the first human eye saw the first star in
the sky, that we were meant to go there. Today's truth
are always tomorrows falsehood -- the light barrier going
down is just a matter of time.

:-)

On 05/28/2017 01:48 AM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Sun 28 May 2017 01:28:49a, T told us...

On 05/28/2017 12:28 AM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Sun 28 May 2017 12:09:16a, Bod told us...


Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1
contradict the time claimed for the evolution of all these
things, but the order of creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts
the order of events in the evolutionary story in at least 30
points. For example, the Bible says the earth was created before
light and before the sun and stars, just the opposite of the
big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees were created
before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land
animals), exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story.
Evolution says that initially the earth was a hot molten ball
that cooled to develop a hard crust, and then evolved an
atmosphere that produced rain, and then with the help of melted
asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth was
completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been
covered with a global ocean. But according to the Bible the
earth has been completely covered with water twice: the first
two days of creation and Noah€„¢s Flood. It is impossible
to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology or the
evolutionary story of earth€„¢s development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding
millions of years to the days or between the days relates to the
order. If the €ŀœdays€ÂÂ� are figurative of long ages,
then so are the €ŀœevenings€ÂÂ� and the
€ŀœmornings.€ÂÂ� But how could plants survive millions of
years of darkness? Or how could they reproduce if they had to
wait hundreds of millions of years before insects and animals
were created that would pollinate the plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...and-eve/when-w
as -adam-created/


I can't say that I don't belive in God, and I have read every
word of the Bible more than once. However, I have always found
it hard to rationalize the creation theory in Genesis when
compared to what appears to be evolutionary fact.


Hi Wayne,

Genesis was always meant to be a story, not scientific fact.
It was to displace the notion that clouds in the sky were
the flatulence of gods riding over the skies in chariots,
etc, etc etc.. These were acts of nature, not gods.

And Bod is glossing over just how close Saint Moses got to
what we actually think happened. Darwin probably got
his idea on evolution from Saint Moses from the fish
coming on land and developing feet.

And Genesis was despised by the pagan of that time
as well, not just Bob and others of our time.

And evolution was never meant to be anything other than
science and as such is a moving target. 200 years from
today, there will be a theory to replace it and everyone
will laugh at evolution just as today we laugh at "caloric" and
the "first law of thermodynamics" (matter and energy can
neither be created or destroyed -- obviously not true).

Keep in mind what the saints say about science: Seek ye not
the truth in science, as today's truth are always tomorrows
falsehoods. But rather seek the truth in Jesus Christ, who
is the way, the truth, and the light.

As the Bible says:

And he hath given men skill, that he might be honoured
in his marvellous works.
-- Wisdom of Sirach (Apocrypha), chapter 38, v6, KJV:

When you learn about scientific discoveries, think Glory
Be To God for all his marvellous works. And the fact that
despite his creation being beyond our limited capacity
to comprehend, he still love us each individually and call
us to a personal relationship with him

Bod is trolling and acting like a jerk in the process.
The idea is to be inflammatory to keep the conversation
going as long as possible. And the weird part is that he
doesn't need to. He is a interesting guy all on his own
without being a jerk.

Yours in Christ,
-Todd

I would love to see the speed of light broken. I do believe
that ever since the first human eye saw the first star in
the sky, that we were meant to go there. Today's truth
are always tomorrows falsehood -- the light barrier going
down is just a matter of time.

:-)


Thank you! I suspected as much, and I won't feed his fire. :-)


You are most welcome.

On Sun, 28 May 2017 08:09:16 +0100, Bod wrote:


Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noahs
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
€œdays€� are figurative of long ages, then so are the €œevenings€� and the
€œmornings.€� But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/

Just like in films and other fictitious works, there are bound to be continuity errors.

--
According to the Guinness Book of World Records, Wolfgang Butterballs of Staines, England jettisoned a record 813ml of ejaculate on June 22, 1997. The average is 3.5ml.

On 5/28/2017 3:09 AM, Bod wrote:

Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noahs
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
€œdays€� are figurative of long ages, then so are the €œevenings€� and the
€œmornings.€� But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/



The bible is just a big game of telephone. It's merely a "Once Upon A
Time" book of allegories passed through the centuries continuously
edited until the self-righteous religious leaders were satisfied with
it's contents and even now, it's all subjected to each interpretation.

On Sun, 28 May 2017 12:11:52 +0100, Meanie wrote:

On 5/28/2017 3:09 AM, Bod wrote:

Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noahs
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
€œdays€� are figurative of long ages, then so are the €œevenings€� and the
€œmornings.€� But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/

The bible is just a big game of telephone. It's merely a "Once Upon A
Time" book of allegories passed through the centuries continuously
edited until the self-righteous religious leaders were satisfied with
it's contents and even now, it's all subjected to each interpretation.

I thought you were religious, or am I confusing you with Muggles?

--
An Emergency Call Centre worker has been fired in Toronto much to the dismay of her colleagues, who were unhappy with her dismissal.
It seems that a caller dialled 911 from a cell phone stating, "I'm depressed and lying on a railway line so that when the train comes I can finally meet Allah."
To which the call centre employee replied, "Remain calm and stay on the line."

On Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 4:28:53 AM UTC-4, T wrote:

And evolution was never meant to be anything other than
science and as such is a moving target. 200 years from
today, there will be a theory to replace it and everyone
will laugh at evolution just as today we laugh at "caloric" and
the "first law of thermodynamics" (matter and energy can
neither be created or destroyed -- obviously not true).

Can you elaborate a little on this?

Cindy Hamilton

On 5/28/2017 7:42 AM, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2017 12:11:52 +0100, Meanie wrote:

On 5/28/2017 3:09 AM, Bod wrote:

Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noahs
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
€œdays€� are figurative of long ages, then so are the €œevenings€� and the
€œmornings.€� But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/


The bible is just a big game of telephone. It's merely a "Once Upon A
Time" book of allegories passed through the centuries continuously
edited until the self-righteous religious leaders were satisfied with
it's contents and even now, it's all subjected to each interpretation.

I thought you were religious, or am I confusing you with Muggles?


You're confusing me with any religious nut.

On Sun, 28 May 2017 06:21:55 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
wrote:

On Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 4:28:53 AM UTC-4, T wrote:

And evolution was never meant to be anything other than
science and as such is a moving target. 200 years from
today, there will be a theory to replace it and everyone
will laugh at evolution just as today we laugh at "caloric" and
the "first law of thermodynamics" (matter and energy can
neither be created or destroyed -- obviously not true).

Can you elaborate a little on this?

Cindy Hamilton

Cindy, you are very diplomatic. Kudos to you.

On Sun, 28 May 2017 07:11:52 -0400, Meanie wrote:

On 5/28/2017 3:09 AM, Bod wrote:

Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noah’s
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earth’s development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
“days” are figurative of long ages, then so are the “evenings” and the
“mornings.” But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/



The bible is just a big game of telephone. It's merely a "Once Upon A
Time" book of allegories passed through the centuries continuously
edited until the self-righteous religious leaders were satisfied with
it's contents and even now, it's all subjected to each interpretation.

This covers it, in a nutshell:

http://imgur.com/a/w43Lj

On Sun, 28 May 2017 15:40:52 +0100, Stormin' Norman wrote:

On Sun, 28 May 2017 07:11:52 -0400, Meanie wrote:

On 5/28/2017 3:09 AM, Bod wrote:

Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noahs
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
€œdays€� are figurative of long ages, then so are the €œevenings€� and the
€œmornings.€� But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/



The bible is just a big game of telephone. It's merely a "Once Upon A
Time" book of allegories passed through the centuries continuously
edited until the self-righteous religious leaders were satisfied with
it's contents and even now, it's all subjected to each interpretation..

This covers it, in a nutshell:

http://imgur.com/a/w43Lj

ROFL!

--
Polynesia -- memory loss in parrots.

On 05/28/2017 09:40 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:

[snip]

The bible is just a big game of telephone. It's merely a "Once Upon A
Time" book of allegories passed through the centuries continuously
edited until the self-righteous religious leaders were satisfied with
it's contents and even now, it's all subjected to each interpretation.

This covers it, in a nutshell:

http://imgur.com/a/w43Lj


And it's also propaganda. Writing meant to persuade rather than inform
or entertain.

On 28/05/2017 15:52, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2017 15:40:52 +0100, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Sun, 28 May 2017 07:11:52 -0400, Meanie wrote:

On 5/28/2017 3:09 AM, Bod wrote:

Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created
before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the
earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been
completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noahs
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding
millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
€œdays€� are figurative of long ages, then so are the €œevenings€� and the
€œmornings.€� But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/




The bible is just a big game of telephone. It's merely a "Once Upon A
Time" book of allegories passed through the centuries continuously
edited until the self-righteous religious leaders were satisfied with
it's contents and even now, it's all subjected to each interpretation.

This covers it, in a nutshell:

http://imgur.com/a/w43Lj

ROFL!

Lol.

On Sun, 28 May 2017 07:28:27 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Sun 28 May 2017 12:09:16a, Bod told us...


Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict
the time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the
order of creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of
events in the evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For
example, the Bible says the earth was created before light and
before the sun and stars, just the opposite of the big-bang
theory. The Bible says that fruit trees were created before any
sea creatures and that birds were created before dinosaurs (which
were made on day 6, since they are land animals), exactly the
opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that initially
the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then
with the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis
says the earth was completely covered with water for two days and
then dry land appeared. According to evolution, the earth has
never been covered with a global ocean. But according to the Bible
the earth has been completely covered with water twice: the first
two days of creation and Noahs Flood. It is impossible to
harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology or the evolutionary
story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding
millions of years to the days or between the days relates to the
order. If the €œdays€? are figurative of long ages, then so are
the €œevenings€? and the €œmornings.€? But how could plants
survive millions of years of darkness? Or how could they reproduce
if they had to wait hundreds of millions of years before insects
and animals were created that would pollinate the plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...d-eve/when-was
-adam-created/


I can't say that I don't belive in God, and I have read every word of
the Bible more than once. However, I have always found it hard to
rationalize the creation theory in Genesis when compared to what
appears to be evolutionary fact.
Just remember Genesis isn't a scientific textbook, or even a full
history test. It is part of a very long-term oral tradition reduced to
text several thousands of years ago and perhaps also many thousands of
years "after the fact" - a record of "God"'s faithfullness to the
family of Abraham (in particular). As such, it is written in language
and terms understandable by a people with no extensive scientific
knowledge or any concept of very large numbers of years. It is written
in large extent in "idiom" and translated several times from language
to language..

Just because it is not 100% accurate and complete in all the details
does not make it any less "true" - when taken for what it is, and was.

On Sun, 28 May 2017 14:40:52 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Sun, 28 May 2017 07:11:52 -0400, Meanie wrote:

On 5/28/2017 3:09 AM, Bod wrote:

Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict the
time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the order of
creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of events in the
evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For example, the Bible says
the earth was created before light and before the sun and stars, just
the opposite of the big-bang theory. The Bible says that fruit trees
were created before any sea creatures and that birds were created before
dinosaurs (which were made on day 6, since they are land animals),
exactly the opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that
initially the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then with
the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis says the earth
was completely covered with water for two days and then dry land
appeared. According to evolution, the earth has never been covered with
a global ocean. But according to the Bible the earth has been completely
covered with water twice: the first two days of creation and Noah’s
Flood. It is impossible to harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology
or the evolutionary story of earth’s development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding millions
of years to the days or between the days relates to the order. If the
“days” are figurative of long ages, then so are the “evenings” and the
“mornings.” But how could plants survive millions of years of darkness?
Or how could they reproduce if they had to wait hundreds of millions of
years before insects and animals were created that would pollinate the
plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...-adam-created/



The bible is just a big game of telephone. It's merely a "Once Upon A
Time" book of allegories passed through the centuries continuously
edited until the self-righteous religious leaders were satisfied with
it's contents and even now, it's all subjected to each interpretation.

This covers it, in a nutshell:

http://imgur.com/a/w43Lj
Well, you are right about the nut - whether in a shell or out - - -

On 5/28/2017 4:15 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2017 07:28:27 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Sun 28 May 2017 12:09:16a, Bod told us...


Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict
the time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the
order of creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of
events in the evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For
example, the Bible says the earth was created before light and
before the sun and stars, just the opposite of the big-bang
theory. The Bible says that fruit trees were created before any
sea creatures and that birds were created before dinosaurs (which
were made on day 6, since they are land animals), exactly the
opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that initially
the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then
with the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis
says the earth was completely covered with water for two days and
then dry land appeared. According to evolution, the earth has
never been covered with a global ocean. But according to the Bible
the earth has been completely covered with water twice: the first
two days of creation and Noahs Flood. It is impossible to
harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology or the evolutionary
story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding
millions of years to the days or between the days relates to the
order. If the €œdays€? are figurative of long ages, then so are
the €œevenings€? and the €œmornings.€? But how could plants
survive millions of years of darkness? Or how could they reproduce
if they had to wait hundreds of millions of years before insects
and animals were created that would pollinate the plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...d-eve/when-was
-adam-created/


I can't say that I don't belive in God, and I have read every word of
the Bible more than once. However, I have always found it hard to
rationalize the creation theory in Genesis when compared to what
appears to be evolutionary fact.
Just remember Genesis isn't a scientific textbook, or even a full
history test. It is part of a very long-term oral tradition reduced to
text several thousands of years ago and perhaps also many thousands of
years "after the fact" - a record of "God"'s faithfullness to the
family of Abraham (in particular). As such, it is written in language
and terms understandable by a people with no extensive scientific
knowledge or any concept of very large numbers of years. It is written
in large extent in "idiom" and translated several times from language
to language..

Just because it is not 100% accurate and complete in all the details
does not make it any less "true" - when taken for what it is, and was.


I agree!

--
Maggie

On Sun, 28 May 2017 17:15:54 -0400, wrote:

Just because it is not 100% accurate and complete in all the details
does not make it any less "true" - when taken for what it is, and was.

Ahh, the spin of the faithful. By any chance, are you related to
Kellyanne Conway? ;-)

On 5/28/2017 5:15 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2017 07:28:27 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Sun 28 May 2017 12:09:16a, Bod told us...


Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict
the time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the
order of creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of
events in the evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For
example, the Bible says the earth was created before light and
before the sun and stars, just the opposite of the big-bang
theory. The Bible says that fruit trees were created before any
sea creatures and that birds were created before dinosaurs (which
were made on day 6, since they are land animals), exactly the
opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that initially
the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then
with the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis
says the earth was completely covered with water for two days and
then dry land appeared. According to evolution, the earth has
never been covered with a global ocean. But according to the Bible
the earth has been completely covered with water twice: the first
two days of creation and Noah€„¢s Flood. It is impossible to
harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology or the evolutionary
story of earth€„¢s development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding
millions of years to the days or between the days relates to the
order. If the €œdays€? are figurative of long ages, then so are
the €œevenings€? and the €œmornings.€? But how could plants
survive millions of years of darkness? Or how could they reproduce
if they had to wait hundreds of millions of years before insects
and animals were created that would pollinate the plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...d-eve/when-was
-adam-created/


I can't say that I don't belive in God, and I have read every word of
the Bible more than once. However, I have always found it hard to
rationalize the creation theory in Genesis when compared to what
appears to be evolutionary fact.
Just remember Genesis isn't a scientific textbook, or even a full
history test. It is part of a very long-term oral tradition reduced to
text several thousands of years ago and perhaps also many thousands of
years "after the fact" - a record of "God"'s faithfullness to the
family of Abraham (in particular). As such, it is written in language
and terms understandable by a people with no extensive scientific
knowledge or any concept of very large numbers of years. It is written
in large extent in "idiom" and translated several times from language
to language..

Just because it is not 100% accurate and complete in all the details
does not make it any less "true" - when taken for what it is, and was.


It is true that a book of religious literature of allegories exists, but
you cannot prove the existence of a supreme being. You simply prove that
people will follow an indoctrinated dogma because it symbolizes goodness
and that is merely an emotional state of mind. It's a conditioning for
people to believe as they were reared. Hence why geography plays a key
role in religious belief. They all have different idols and believe as
it teaches. It is only true that people will believe if they view the
benefits for their self worth.

An Intelligent Person Doesn't Need The Promise Of Heaven To See The
Merit Of Good Deeds.

-- Anonymous

On 05/28/2017 06:21 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 4:28:53 AM UTC-4, T wrote:

And evolution was never meant to be anything other than
science and as such is a moving target. 200 years from
today, there will be a theory to replace it and everyone
will laugh at evolution just as today we laugh at "caloric" and
the "first law of thermodynamics" (matter and energy can
neither be created or destroyed -- obviously not true).

Can you elaborate a little on this?

Cindy Hamilton


Hi Cindy,

Su

Caloric:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caloric_theory

The caloric theory is an obsolete scientific theory that
heat consists of a self-repellent fluid called caloric
that flows from hotter bodies to colder bodies. Caloric
was also thought of as a weightless gas that could pass
in and out of pores in solids and liquids. The "caloric
theory" was superseded by the mid-19th century in favor
of the mechanical theory of heat, but nevertheless
persisted in some scientific literature€”particularly
in more popular treatments€”until the end of the 19th century

What brought its downfall was when canon makers drill bits
got dull such that no material was removed and the cooling
water boiled violently


1st law of Thermodynamics:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamics
The first law of thermodynamics is an expression of the
principle of conservation of energy. It states that energy
can be transformed (changed from one form to another),
but cannot be created or destroyed

Obviously this is not the case. Einstein's equation
Energy = Mass x (Universal Constant [speed of light]) squared
Put that to rest.

Examples:
Q. What is being transformed in a nuclear power plant?
A. Mass is being transformed into energy

Q. How are Transuranic elements formed?
A. By applying energy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transuranium_element

The theory of evolution is very nicely researched and documented.
There are "some holes in it though. This makes the field of research
fascinating as there are many more things to be discovered.
A couple of the biggies as 1) were are the mistakes and
2) how did certain things come about that would have killed
the animal in the process of getting there (a giraffe's neck
and exploring fire out of a bugs rear end for instance).

This is the thing about science. It is pealing the layers
off God creation. There will never be an end to it.
It is a moving target. Today's truths are always
tomorrows falsehoods. This is why turning science into
a religious belief system is foolish. Science and religoun
should never be mixed.

Since you are not a believer, let me tell your the rules
for Christians. Science is the study of God's creation.
Nothing more and nothing less. "That" God created
"all things visible and invisible (the universe)" is
a tenant of faith. "How" is not. That is your own
personal belief.

Those Christians who act like the Bible is a science book
are wildly misinterpreting it. The Bible is a book of
Theology and History. And the "days" spoken of by Saint
Moses are the "Lord's days", not human days. For starters,
Saint Moses use the word "day" before the earth was even
created. And it was never meant as science. It was meant
to explain that events in nature were just that and not
acts of the gods. Pagans at the time were really ****ed
at it, so this generation's pagan's wrath is nothing new.

And if the Lord decided to use evolution as one of
his methods of creation, then Glory be to God.
(Saint Moses actually spoke of it with the fish coming
on dry land and developing feet, which is probably where
the idea of evolution came about.)

As the Bible says:

And he hath given men skill, that he might be honoured
in his marvellous works.
-- Wisdom of Sirach (Apocrypha), chapter 38, v6, KJV:

Yours,
-T

p.s. We are living in the Seventh Day. We all await the
Eight Day and the second coming of our Lord.

On Sun, 28 May 2017 20:02:52 -0400, Meanie wrote:

On 5/28/2017 5:15 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2017 07:28:27 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:

On Sun 28 May 2017 12:09:16a, Bod told us...


Not only does the time period of creation in Genesis 1 contradict
the time claimed for the evolution of all these things, but the
order of creation in Genesis 1 also contradicts the order of
events in the evolutionary story in at least 30 points. For
example, the Bible says the earth was created before light and
before the sun and stars, just the opposite of the big-bang
theory. The Bible says that fruit trees were created before any
sea creatures and that birds were created before dinosaurs (which
were made on day 6, since they are land animals), exactly the
opposite of the evolutionary story. Evolution says that initially
the earth was a hot molten ball that cooled to develop a hard
crust, and then evolved an atmosphere that produced rain, and then
with the help of melted asteroids produced oceans. But Genesis
says the earth was completely covered with water for two days and
then dry land appeared. According to evolution, the earth has
never been covered with a global ocean. But according to the Bible
the earth has been completely covered with water twice: the first
two days of creation and Noahs Flood. It is impossible to
harmonize Genesis 1 with big-bang cosmology or the evolutionary
story of earths development.35

In addition to these contradictions, another obstacle to adding
millions of years to the days or between the days relates to the
order. If the €œdays€? are figurative of long ages, then so are
the €œevenings€? and the €œmornings.€? But how could plants
survive millions of years of darkness? Or how could they reproduce
if they had to wait hundreds of millions of years before insects
and animals were created that would pollinate the plants?

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-c...d-eve/when-was
-adam-created/


I can't say that I don't belive in God, and I have read every word of
the Bible more than once. However, I have always found it hard to
rationalize the creation theory in Genesis when compared to what
appears to be evolutionary fact.
Just remember Genesis isn't a scientific textbook, or even a full
history test. It is part of a very long-term oral tradition reduced to
text several thousands of years ago and perhaps also many thousands of
years "after the fact" - a record of "God"'s faithfullness to the
family of Abraham (in particular). As such, it is written in language
and terms understandable by a people with no extensive scientific
knowledge or any concept of very large numbers of years. It is written
in large extent in "idiom" and translated several times from language
to language..

Just because it is not 100% accurate and complete in all the details
does not make it any less "true" - when taken for what it is, and was.


It is true that a book of religious literature of allegories exists, but
you cannot prove the existence of a supreme being. You simply prove that
people will follow an indoctrinated dogma because it symbolizes goodness
and that is merely an emotional state of mind. It's a conditioning for
people to believe as they were reared. Hence why geography plays a key
role in religious belief. They all have different idols and believe as
it teaches. It is only true that people will believe if they view the
benefits for their self worth.

An Intelligent Person Doesn't Need The Promise Of Heaven To See The
Merit Of Good Deeds.

-- Anonymous

Don't forget, all religions exist as tools for one group of people to
influence, control and extract resources from another, much larger
group of people.

Deities are inventions of humans, little different than a pry bar,
tools to separate people from their valuables and gain control over
their free will.

Religions are tools of the unscrupulous and a refuge for the weak of
mind.

On Mon, 29 May 2017 01:12:54 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:



Don't forget, all religions exist as tools for one group of people to
influence, control and extract resources from another, much larger
group of people.

Deities are inventions of humans, little different than a pry bar,
tools to separate people from their valuables and gain control over
their free will.

Religions are tools of the unscrupulous and a refuge for the weak of
mind.


I am sorry you have had such a bad experience with "religions"
Some organizations may indeed be as you say - but most certainly not
all. What you describe is a theocracy, like the catholic church.

There are religeous organizations that have no "elite class" that
"lives off the masses"

On 5/28/2017 9:36 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2017 01:12:54 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:



Don't forget, all religions exist as tools for one group of people to
influence, control and extract resources from another, much larger
group of people.

Deities are inventions of humans, little different than a pry bar,
tools to separate people from their valuables and gain control over
their free will.

Religions are tools of the unscrupulous and a refuge for the weak of
mind.


I am sorry you have had such a bad experience with "religions"
Some organizations may indeed be as you say - but most certainly not
all. What you describe is a theocracy, like the catholic church.

There are religeous organizations that have no "elite class" that
"lives off the masses"


http://www.alternet.org/belief/6-way...-more-bad-good

http://www.barnorama.com/when-religi...self-look-bad/

On Sun, 28 May 2017 21:36:45 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 29 May 2017 01:12:54 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:



Don't forget, all religions exist as tools for one group of people to
influence, control and extract resources from another, much larger
group of people.

Deities are inventions of humans, little different than a pry bar,
tools to separate people from their valuables and gain control over
their free will.

Religions are tools of the unscrupulous and a refuge for the weak of
mind.


I am sorry you have had such a bad experience with "religions"
Some organizations may indeed be as you say - but most certainly not
all. What you describe is a theocracy, like the catholic church.

There are religeous organizations that have no "elite class" that
"lives off the masses"

You are sorry I have had bad experiences with religions? That is
pretty funny, but not unexpected.

Religions across time and the entire planet have been victimizing
their followers in the name of non-existent deities. Every religion
from evangelical christianity to scientology is nothing but a cult. In
fact, the only difference between a cult and a religion is the size of
the membership.

Whereas I would not want to prevent anyone from believing in their
personal fairy tales, I do advocate fully taxing all religions as one
would tax any business. There should be no special treatment of
religions.

On 5/28/2017 7:02 PM, Meanie wrote:

you cannot prove the existence of a supreme being.

You cannot prove the existence of love, hate, envy, etc. You can only
show examples of what you think is a result of it.


--
Maggie

Those Christians who act like the Bible is a science book
are wildly misinterpreting it. The Bible is a book of
Theology and History. And the "days" spoken of by Saint
Moses are the "Lord's days", not human days. For starters,
Saint Moses use the word "day" before the earth was even
created. And it was never meant as science. It was meant
to explain that events in nature were just that and not
acts of the gods. Pagans at the time were really ****ed
at it, so this generation's pagan's wrath is nothing new.

And if the Lord decided to use evolution as one of
his methods of creation, then Glory be to God.
(Saint Moses actually spoke of it with the fish coming
on dry land and developing feet, which is probably where
the idea of evolution came about.)

As the Bible says:

And he hath given men skill, that he might be honoured
in his marvellous works.
-- Wisdom of Sirach (Apocrypha), chapter 38, v6, KJV:

Yours,
-T

p.s. We are living in the Seventh Day. We all await the
Eight Day and the second coming of our Lord.

Did the voices in your head tell you this?

On 5/28/2017 10:50 PM, Bod wrote:

p.s. We are living in the Seventh Day. We all await the
Eight Day and the second coming of our Lord.

Did the voices in your head tell you this?


Did the voice in your head tell you that you love your wife?

--
Maggie

On 29/05/2017 03:46, Meanie wrote:
On 5/28/2017 9:36 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2017 01:12:54 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:



Don't forget, all religions exist as tools for one group of people to
influence, control and extract resources from another, much larger
group of people.

Deities are inventions of humans, little different than a pry bar,
tools to separate people from their valuables and gain control over
their free will.

Religions are tools of the unscrupulous and a refuge for the weak of
mind.


I am sorry you have had such a bad experience with "religions"
Some organizations may indeed be as you say - but most certainly not
all. What you describe is a theocracy, like the catholic church.

There are religeous organizations that have no "elite class" that
"lives off the masses"


http://www.alternet.org/belief/6-way...-more-bad-good

Spot on.

On 05/28/2017 08:50 PM, Bod wrote:

Those Christians who act like the Bible is a science book
are wildly misinterpreting it. The Bible is a book of
Theology and History. And the "days" spoken of by Saint
Moses are the "Lord's days", not human days. For starters,
Saint Moses use the word "day" before the earth was even
created. And it was never meant as science. It was meant
to explain that events in nature were just that and not
acts of the gods. Pagans at the time were really ****ed
at it, so this generation's pagan's wrath is nothing new.

And if the Lord decided to use evolution as one of
his methods of creation, then Glory be to God.
(Saint Moses actually spoke of it with the fish coming
on dry land and developing feet, which is probably where
the idea of evolution came about.)

As the Bible says:

And he hath given men skill, that he might be honoured
in his marvellous works.
-- Wisdom of Sirach (Apocrypha), chapter 38, v6, KJV:

Yours,
-T

p.s. We are living in the Seventh Day. We all await the
Eight Day and the second coming of our Lord.

Did the voices in your head tell you this?

You are a funny bunny!

On 29/05/2017 03:47, Meanie wrote:
http://www.barnorama.com/when-religi...self-look-bad/


LOL, I like this one in that link "A free thinker is Satan's slave".

On 29/05/2017 04:13, Muggles wrote:
On 5/28/2017 7:02 PM, Meanie wrote:

you cannot prove the existence of a supreme being.

You cannot prove the existence of love, hate, envy, etc. You can only
show examples of what you think is a result of it.


Hate and envy are not any of my traits.

On Mon, 29 May 2017 05:16:10 +0100, Bod wrote:
You cannot prove the existence of love, hate, envy,
etc. You can only show examples of what you think
is a result of it.

Hate and envy are not any of my traits.

So, I should just take your word for it?

--
Maggie

On 29/05/2017 04:51, Muggles wrote:
On 5/28/2017 10:50 PM, Bod wrote:

p.s. We are living in the Seventh Day. We all await the
Eight Day and the second coming of our Lord.

Did the voices in your head tell you this?


Did the voice in your head tell you that you love your wife?

I don't have voices in my head. I show my love both physically and
emotionally. Something that you don't appear to understand.

On Sun, 28 May 2017 22:46:08 -0400, Meanie wrote:

On 5/28/2017 9:36 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2017 01:12:54 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:



Don't forget, all religions exist as tools for one group of people to
influence, control and extract resources from another, much larger
group of people.

Deities are inventions of humans, little different than a pry bar,
tools to separate people from their valuables and gain control over
their free will.

Religions are tools of the unscrupulous and a refuge for the weak of
mind.


I am sorry you have had such a bad experience with "religions"
Some organizations may indeed be as you say - but most certainly not
all. What you describe is a theocracy, like the catholic church.

There are religeous organizations that have no "elite class" that
"lives off the masses"


http://www.alternet.org/belief/6-way...-more-bad-good
That is the opinion of the English Catholic (church of England) and RC
churches by the English.

The assessment of those 2 "religious Institutions" may be accurate -
they are "theocracies", not religions or true "churches" or
"religions" or "faiths"

On Mon, 29 May 2017 05:28:46 +0100, Bod wrote:
Did the voices in your head tell you this?

Did the voice in your head tell you that you love
your wife?


I don't have voices in my head. I show my love both
physically and emotionally. Something that you don't
appear to understand.

Prove you love your wife.

Prove love exists.

Simply telling me you SHOW love is not proof. It's simply your
interpretation of something you feel exists.

How is that any different from a belief in God?

--
Maggie

On 29/05/2017 05:26, Muggles wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2017 05:16:10 +0100, Bod wrote:
You cannot prove the existence of love, hate, envy,
etc. You can only show examples of what you think
is a result of it.

Hate and envy are not any of my traits.

So, I should just take your word for it?

No ,but if you met me, it would be obvious to you.
Actions speak louder than words, except in your case it's the opposite.

On Mon, 29 May 2017 05:41:36 +0100, Bod wrote:
Hate and envy are not any of my traits.


So, I should just take your word for it?


No ,but if you met me, it would be obvious to you.
Actions speak louder than words, except in your
case it's the opposite.

I want you to prove what you say exists.

Why can't you do that? It should be simple.

--
Maggie

On Mon, 29 May 2017 03:07:44 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Sun, 28 May 2017 21:36:45 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 29 May 2017 01:12:54 +0000, Stormin' Norman
wrote:



Don't forget, all religions exist as tools for one group of people to
influence, control and extract resources from another, much larger
group of people.

Deities are inventions of humans, little different than a pry bar,
tools to separate people from their valuables and gain control over
their free will.

Religions are tools of the unscrupulous and a refuge for the weak of
mind.


I am sorry you have had such a bad experience with "religions"
Some organizations may indeed be as you say - but most certainly not
all. What you describe is a theocracy, like the catholic church.

There are religeous organizations that have no "elite class" that
"lives off the masses"

You are sorry I have had bad experiences with religions? That is
pretty funny, but not unexpected.

Religions across time and the entire planet have been victimizing
their followers in the name of non-existent deities. Every religion
from evangelical christianity to scientology is nothing but a cult. In
fact, the only difference between a cult and a religion is the size of
the membership.

A total fallacy, as there are cults larger than some religions.

Whereas I would not want to prevent anyone from believing in their
personal fairy tales, I do advocate fully taxing all religions as one
would tax any business. There should be no special treatment of
religions.
Many "religions" or churches provide social services and education,
and health care free of charge to those who cannot afford these
services, irrespective of their beliefs or lack there of. It was
religions that established schools and hospitals in most of the world.

One of the most effective "relief agencies" in the world is a church
organization called the "mennonite central committee"

Another "faith based organization" that is very well known to
survivors of natural disasters across North America from the hollers
of Kentucky (Whitesburg/Hazzard etc), to the flood-ravaged vallets of
New York State (Elmira/Corning etc) to hurricane ravaged New Orleans,
is "MDS" - Mennonite Disaster Service.

All volunteer labour, helping those in need due to no fault of their
own - entirely out of their "religious beliefs"

No question of faith or creed - the help is available to all who need
it.

On 29/05/2017 05:41, Muggles wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2017 05:28:46 +0100, Bod wrote:
Did the voices in your head tell you this?

Did the voice in your head tell you that you love
your wife?


I don't have voices in my head. I show my love both
physically and emotionally. Something that you don't
appear to understand.

Prove you love your wife.

Prove love exists.
Simply telling me you SHOW love is not proof. It's simply your
interpretation of something you feel exists.

How is that any different from a belief in God?

Because my wife is real. Kindness is closely linked to love and that is
easily *physically* proven in the real world, with real people.

On 29/05/2017 05:46, Muggles wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2017 05:41:36 +0100, Bod wrote:
Hate and envy are not any of my traits.


So, I should just take your word for it?


No ,but if you met me, it would be obvious to you.
Actions speak louder than words, except in your
case it's the opposite.

I want you to prove what you say exists.
Why can't you do that? It should be simple.

Like I said, my wife will verify that I show her love by my actions.
You only have to ask her. Can you ask your god in person?
For all you know, your god might be a control freak playing a game.
Your god might be playing you like a fiddle.