Let's cut through the chase: Darwin didn't exist.
- Thread starter answers
- Start date
answers, we said contemporary evidence. Writing during the time about the person. And ironically enough there was a HUGE history written covering the time and place and no mention of anything about any Jesus, namely a seven-volume account in Greek known to us as the Bellum Iudaicum and the twenty-one volume Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus in the first century.answers said:There is no historical evidence that Darwin existed! And all the historical evidence that shows that he existed is wrong! Why because I said so!
(see I'm learning from you athiests now)
Sorry if you do not like that but it is the truth.
There was no Jesus.
Even the Gnostic Xians knew that and they made up 50% of the population of early Xians. If Xians didn't believe that Jesus was a real person then more than likely the Jesus story was just an allegory.
Michael
The real topic here isn't whether Darwin existed or not. It isn't even the anger and frustration that religious nutters have when faced with questions of evidence about their gods.
The real topic for discussion here is the consistently silly, yet superstitious nature, of religious nutters who think that Darwin is a god to atheists because he is considered the father of natural selection as an explanation for the fact of evolution. The fascinating thing, worthy of discussion, is their need to find a deity or demon to apply blame for the failure of their cults to explain effectively how life came to be.
The real topic for discussion here is the consistently silly, yet superstitious nature, of religious nutters who think that Darwin is a god to atheists because he is considered the father of natural selection as an explanation for the fact of evolution. The fascinating thing, worthy of discussion, is their need to find a deity or demon to apply blame for the failure of their cults to explain effectively how life came to be.
It would not matter if Darwin didn't exist. Similar theories were being discovered at the same time, and by now science has far surpassed Darwin in this field. Some evangelicals believe Darwin, and some atheists don't care for him. It's not black and white like you think.
davewhite04
Valued Senior Member
(Q) said:
I guess they forgot argubly the greatest mind ever when they wrote this worthless quote, Sir Isaac Newton.
You hit the nail right on the head with Tartarus' gravity hammer.Michael said:
The whole thing is simple an allegorical tale of various events that occurred in and around the region at the time. Jesus himself was probably a composite character, based on multiple people with a similar message of peace and harmony and was well-accepted. So much so that he became a god-like figure after his death, much like Spartacus. The problem is, christians of today concentrate on the "son of god" (fictional exaggeration) rather than the "peace and goodwill towards your fellow human being" (realistic message).
davewhite04
Valued Senior Member
(Q) said:
The quote is obviously extremely biased, probably written by a angry atheist or a closet atheist so it is completely worthless, unless your an atheist who likes to post these quotes as if they are somehow absolutely correct.
Wow. Such grown up talk. "Completely worthless," "angry atheist," "extremely biased."
I'm always amazed at the religious nutter that gets their panties in a wad everytime an atheist or agnostic says something witty and replies with how the atheist must be "angry" or their opinions "worthless." This, coming from the one with superstitious beliefs about sky-gods, zombies, and canabalism.
I'm always amazed at the religious nutter that gets their panties in a wad everytime an atheist or agnostic says something witty and replies with how the atheist must be "angry" or their opinions "worthless." This, coming from the one with superstitious beliefs about sky-gods, zombies, and canabalism.
(Q) said:
davewhite04 said:
(Q) said:
...not forgetting Socrates, and Plato and Milton and Shakespeare and Da Vinci and Michelangelo and Gallileo and Decartes and Spinoza and Kierkegaard and Darwin (until 1851) and Jung and of course Einstein....
Indeed it turns out many of the cleverest people to walk the planet were theists!
Who the hell has heard of Abu'l`Ala' al-Ma`arri anyway (...some obscure 11th centuary arab poet)?!! :bugeye:
davewhite04 said:
If I were blinded by faith, I might agree with you.
But then, if I WERE blinded by faith, I'd be putting in bible quotes that I somehow knew were absolutely correct. And it would be a given that he who wrote those quotes was certainly not biased, angry or living in a closet.
Of course, the quote above was far from completely worthless, it got a rise out of you, didn't it?
Diogenes' Dog said:
Oh look, we have a few more anomolies, less Socrates, who thought the sun and moon were gods, and Plato, who thought the story of creation was just a tale, and Milton, who wrote about Satan being the real hero, and Shakespeare, who it was found only after his death he had professed Catholisism, but no proof was to be found, and Galileo, who went to trial because he did not follow the church, and Spinoza, who although was being groomed to be a rabbi, was excommunicated, and Kierkegaard, who chastised Christian dogma as offensive to reason, and Darwin, who denounced Christianity and died an agnostic, and Jung, whose psychotherapy undermined Christianity.
So it appears there are far from "many" of the cleverest people down to only a couple, at best. Silly theists.
And of course, Einstein was never a religious man, he said so himself. I wish theists would get that through their thick heads.
Theists haven't, since he was "biased, angry and completely worthless."
davewhite04
Valued Senior Member
(Q) said:
I see your point, and it is well founded. But when I use quotes it is to backup my position from a biblical stance, hence I use Bible quotes. Plucking quotes from obscure so called intellectuals to make theists look stupid is childish at best.