Re: Disproving Creation #500: What do "All Flee & Hide", "Andrew-a-Blank" & "Il Never Be Bauck" Believe?
The 2nd Coming
They are brehren of Ishmael. A wild ass of a man child....
Genesis 16...
Judaism? Genesis 17....
Isaiah 14:12, meet the angel in Genesis 16....
(jewishvirtuallibrary.org)
It's a genetic (engineering and psychological) thing....
Since Islam and Judaism exist, and their origin is in Scripture, can
only mean that there is the Almighty God, responsible for those
facts..
That truism does away with all man made belief systems. All false
Gods. There is only ONE Omnnipotent God!
All others, Omniscient....
"And Cain knew his Neanderthal wife" (G. Freeman)....
It's a genetic (engineering) thing, interbreeding. Cain borne only
males! A genetic (engineering) thing. Made us "mysteriously"
disappear....a lot sooner...than if he didn't.....
We are 99.8% Neanderthal genome....
So, HaShem had His son born to a hybrid virgin instead.....
Knowing that. The following ignores the origin of Islam and Judaism.
And the Creator's name, HaShem. He had a reason a,d motive for
making the natural creation. To have a son born into flesh, to a
virgin
He would make. As you can see, it didn't work out that way....
There is a hierarchy at play upon the Earth....
Can ya'll see it.....?
On Jan 23, 4:03 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
> Here we are at FIVE HUNDRED already. Half a thousand refutations,
> mostly of young-Earth creationism in particular, and some of
> creationism in general.
>
> Since young-Earth creationists have such a short attention span, let
> me get this out before I ramble on about anything else. This one is
> so simple that even "All Flee & Hide", "Andrew-a-Blank" & "Il Never Be
> Bauck" can answer it.
>
> The question to you three is this: To what church do you belong?
>
> You typically RUN away when I ask a question, but there's nothing to
> be cowardly about here. All I want to know is which church you're in
> - and not the name and address of the actual church building, but of
> the denomination and sub-sect. Surely you're not so terrified of me
> that you'll run from that question, are you? We'll see.
>
> There are *well* over 20,000 Christian sects (which means about one
> new sect per month since the purported time of your fictional savior -
> so much for *one* church! LoL!). But most Christians belong to one
> of these sects, so which one is yours? Here's something which might
> help you:http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_deno.htm
>
> I posted the first of these threads, and the introduction to the
> series, on September 8th 2010. That means I've been consistently
> posting between 3 and 4 threads per day. And it's been easy! OK,
> once in a while it felt like work, but mostly it was easy, not because
> I'm so great, but because there is so much evidence for evolution and
> so many flaws in creationism that it takes no work at all to publish
> them. The work has been done by hard working scientists the world
> over, many of whom worship the same god that the creationists worship.
>
> And in not one thread of this series has any creationist been able to
> mount a supported rebuttal or to offer any positive science for
> creation. Five Hundred Failures of Creationism! How pathetic is
> that?
>
> In fact, the creationists have been so dishonest as to hijack the
> thread and remove the "Disproving" part of the subject and then tried
> to pass off the thread as their series! But the truth is that they
> haven't posted 384 or 492 or whatever threads supporting creation,
> they've outright LIED. That should tell you all you need to know
> about creationists.
>
> But the sad thing is, where are all the Christians condemning this
> behavior? Nowhere. Apart from Dave Oldridge and maybe one or two
> others, the only people here pointing out the dishonesty and failure
> of the creationists are the atheists. I find that very revealing.
>
> Here was the prediction I made in the introduction: "this typical
> creationist behavior will not change despite the creationists
> supposedly being required to turn the other cheek, to go the extra
> mile, and to give their coat. In short, they're hypocrites to the
> core."
>
> The typical creationist behavior I referred to was described thus:
> "Remember that the science came first; then the creationist cowardice,
> vacuity, dishonesty, lies, and hypocrisy came along. The bad mouthing
> came right after that as a direct consequence of that."
>
> Nothing has changed, In five hundred opportunities (counting the
> intro), creationists could have turned their position around. They
> could have quit lying about the Theory of Evolution. They could have
> quit insulting hard-working and brilliant scientists, many of whom
> worship the same god that they do. They could have quit
> hypocritically demanding that evolutionists explain the last detail of
> every single step whilst the creationists themselves explain nothing -
> and indeed run away whenever they're asked to support or explain.
>
> They could have at the very least made an effort to support their
> position - to support this creator they claim to worship, but they
> couldn't even do that much! The creationists failed.
>
> Seriously, what pathetic witnesses they are for their god! Do they
> honestly think they can win converts by LYING? by showing cowardice?
> by showing they have no positive science for their position? by
> insulting the scientists instead of trying to refute the science?
>
> If they do, they're far more clueless than any of us have hitherto
> believed.
>
> So let's hear from you three excuses for worshipers; let's hear what
> church you're in and I'll get back to you.
>
> Budikka