That's awesome. Anita is an atheist pretending to be a xian fundie.
New Book - The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
- Thread starter Anita Meyer
- Start date
That's awesome. Anita is an atheist pretending to be a xian fundie.
Alphanumeric, the evidence is all around us staring us right in the face! I don’t have to dabble into experimental evidence. I can clearly see that humans come from humans and dogs and cats from dogs and cats. THIS IS A SURE THING! Everything is seed inside itself occurring again and again since any human being has recorded and remembered. Genesis 1:11 - And G-d said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. This is the obvious (in real time), and I don’t need experimental evidence to tell me this!
Science has truly gathered ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! It has only reaffirmed for us what the Bible has already told us, and continues to do so. For instance, when science takes something as simple as a seed and tries to analyze it, cut it open and dissect it, and chemically analyzes it… this still does not really tells us anything of the seeds true nature. The answer of its true nature is incorporated into it only through the long duration of time. The only way we can truly know its true nature is by planting it in the ground and watching and waiting many years to see its fulfillment, which of course is a another tree producing fruit with seed in itself to grow another tree.
We could have never known what the seed was for simply by scientifically analyzing it. G-d had ingeniously preprogrammed it to grow in such a way as to show us exactly what it was designed for. This is also true of you and me! G-d planed from the beginning when He brought us into existence to reflect his glory. Genesis 1:27 - So G-d created man in his own image, in the image of G-d created he him; male and female created he them.
Psalm 8:4-6 - What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. You made him ruler over the works of your hands, you put everything under his feet.
Except there's a certain person using a computer to tell us this amazing fact!Anita Meyer said:
It has a frame made of steel which is ironic, but your post is pure galvanised.
Last edited:
Oh, p.s.
:m: Amen to that, lady.
But you’ve said it yourself V… I, like God, do not play with dice and I don't believe in coincidences.
Re. New Book - The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator.
If one uses the term 'BOOK' [a multi-page continueing narrative], then the first alphabetical book is the Hebrew bible. I get KO'd when someone puts up a hard copy of an alphabetical book older than the Hebrew bible. Go for it!
Re. New Book - The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator.
If one uses the term 'BOOK' [a multi-page continueing narrative], then the first alphabetical book is the Hebrew bible. I get KO'd when someone puts up a hard copy of an alphabetical book older than the Hebrew bible. Go for it!
I bekleive the Hindu Vedas are older
The 'look at the trees' argument is insufficient. You have yet to present anything which is not either a vague interpretation of passages in the bible or an unjustified assertion. Not only have you failed to justify your claims, you're made claims which are demonstrably false.
The truth doesn't need lies to support it, you shouldn't have to resort to the usual default creationist nonsense.
Says who? Certainly not a rational person. If you honestly care whether or not your beliefs are true then you should be willing to put them to the test, to see if they stand up. 1st Peter 3:15 says you should always be ready to provide reason for your belief but when I ask you you can't provide.
Furthermore you can't back up assertions you've made about science, you said various parts of evolution have been debunked. If that were true you wouldn't need to do any experiments yourself, you should have the work of others at your fingertips to provide to other people.
And what observations and data have you been considering? Your experience with animals and people, with people giving birth to people and cats to cats? That is insufficient to evaluate evolution, as the time scales involves are into the millions of years. What evidence have you evaluated which involves biological diversity over the last 3 billions years? None. So your 'sure thing' is another assertion without evidence.
Haven't you grasp it yet? Simply asserting things isn't going to convince a rational person. You're doing even worse than that, as you're often asserting things which are known to be false. You might have had some luck convincing some people by pure assertion but you're going to find that doesn't work with people who actually care whether or not their beliefs are true.
I don't believe in Bigfoot because the evidence presented by people who do I find to be insufficient. I don't believe in Zeus as the evidence is insufficient. I don't believe in the Abrahamic deity because you and people like you have failed to present evidence.
Ardent creationists seem to have a mental block in understanding that evidence and asserting things are not synonymous. You don't believe in Zeus or Odin or Krishna and you would probably admit its because there's no evidence or reason to believe in them. The same applies to your preferred deity but you likely compartmentalise your mind to avoid thinking about it.
Since human civilisation is only about 10,000 years old (about 400 generators) its not going to have been witness to large scale evolution across the entire planet. This doesn't falsify evolution because that's entirely in line with what evolution describes. I suppose you're doubly entrenched in your belief in this regard as you think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old so time scales into the millions or billions of years contradicts both the myths you have about the creation of the universe and creation of humans.
I can understand why you and others would want to think of humans as special but we're not. The universe existed before we did and it'll exist long after we're gone. Clinging to the "God made all of this for us, we're special" notion is akin to a child with a security blanket.
Other than triple the human life span in a matter of a few hundred years, managed to feed billions of people, taken us to the Moon and allowed us to understand the inner workings of atoms and the dynamics of the stars. As someone says above this post, the fact you're communicating to me via a computer linked to a global network which provides almost instant access to pretty much the totality of human knowledge demonstrates your assertion to be false.
You aren't going to convince me by simply repeating things known to be false. If you take the bible literally and think the Earth and universe is <10,000 years old then reality disagrees. It is simply false that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, as the wealth of evidence from almost every area of science attests to.
Asserting things without evidence is a poor argument. Asserting things without evidence repeatedly is even worse. But you're topping that and asserting things where the evidence contradicts your assertion. And the fact you do it repeatedly is astounding. If you think you are correct then you have nothing to fear from looking into the evidence. The fact you don't and the fact you have nothing but the same old creationist talking points demonstrates your intellectual dishonesty. Your started this thread to basically convince people not only God exists but you, above anyone else in history, have determined the 'proof' and whatever messages he supposedly wants us to have. You want to be special, in the same way the belief that humans were made in god's image is to make believers feel special, but your arguments are nothing new, your assertions are so regularly trotted out by creationists its laughable.
Regardless of whether a deity exists, you have been neither original nor insightful in presenting your position. For instance, have you managed to understand why thermodynamics doesn't contradict evolution yet?
None of which supports the notion the bible is true and the Christian god exists. If the bible doesn't contradict something it doesn't mean that something is evidence for the bible.
I've heard muslims present precisely the same argument, about seeds and their complexity, as evidence for their beliefs. The fact seeds grow into trees is not in contradiction to the bible or quran but neither are supported by it.
Another unjustified assertion. You have no evidence for a god and therefore certainly no evidence he created life in pretty much its present form. If a god exists he could have used evolution to create Man, as he'd know the development of life which would ensue given an initial state of a proto-Earth. So asserting a god designed the seed as it is now requires you demonstrate the existence of a god and[/] that the mechanism by which we come to be in our present state is through the process outlined in Genesis. We have knowledge of naturalistic processes which can lead to increasingly complex life so the fact life exists is not automatically evidence for a deity.
Besides, if you go down the road of 'a seed is complex therefore it needs a creator' then you have to then consider 'a creator is complex therefore it needs a creator'. Its a contradiction to say "Everything complex needs to a creator" and then say "Except the creator". Its a logical fallacy known as 'special pleading'.
Remember what I said about providing evidence which isn't just bible quotes? Every single religion with a holy book can spit out a creation myth. You don't accept the Hindu creation story and you wouldn't accept as evidence someone quoting from the Hindu holy book (which is older than the bible too).
Just as quotes from the quran don't sway you, quotes from the bible don't sway me. For every vague passage in the bible which is reinterpreted as some kind of prophecy after a major event has happened there's one in the quran. Many muslims make the same "The quran contains all science" claims as you do about the bible. And their arguments are as vapid and unjustified as yours.
All we have to offer are scientific refutations of your premises. If you don't accept science in the first place, what are you doing here?
In case you had forgotten Anita we are still waiting for your definition of "information"
what's the problem with giving an answer?
Am I detecting a stench greater that that of your bullshit?
the smell of your fear perhaps?
what's the problem with giving an answer?
Am I detecting a stench greater that that of your bullshit?
the smell of your fear perhaps?
Is it in fact possible to tell the difference between the complete shit that fundies like Anita say, and the sort of things someone pretending to be a fundie in order to take the piss out of them would say?
Maybe. There might be an indicator in the consistency of how the crap is presented.
You're right - someone pretending to be a fundie will probably have thought their arguments through more comprehensively than someone who is more used to being told what to think
I suspect that may be the case.
Arfa Brane,
Ah yes, the COMPUTER!
Let me first say that a computer CANNOT create itself unless otherwise created by a like maker with mutual intentions. This is something we share with our Creator - G-d.
Secondly, it's totally amazing, how something that is man made and considered nonliving is still subjected to natures mathematical law of unit growth which has an organizing principle. The main proponent and deduction in all of this is the "Hebrew letters" which I've found is also formed from natures law described in my book demo here:
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltruthpublisher.com/files/Pictures_and_explanation.pdf
But even incredibly more superlative and profound is the persistent new growth of the Internet (World Wide Web). It is not just merely a superficial network of computers linked together by transmission lines, but it also demonstrates "natures mathematical law of unit growth" by some mysterious principle of using the “same growth pattern” (likened onto the branching network of a tree) hiding in its decentralized distributed design. We can see the same organizing and branching growth pattern that is so visually rendering and patently inherited in not just the tree alone, but all living and some non living things such as the computer and its networking ability - the Internet.
Strangely enough, the more I fathom the idea, the Internet seems to be an ecosystem in itself. Perhaps it’s creation was for the purpose and extension of creating an antibody to fight off an invader. When in fact the Internet was designed for just that very intention in the first place, to implement the military with security being that the telephone network was highly vulnerable. So the intention was to create a distributed communications network with the security that if a few links were wiped out it could reroute messages without the need for a central and vulnerable control point that could effect the entirety of the whole network. And the irony of the whole thing is that without even realizing it, “we” modeled this network after the very same fashion that our own human body works, in the way that the white blood cells of our body have that same role and function in fighting off infection and foreign invaders to protect and maintain the body, and the same can also be applied to our nerves system and neurons of our brains in sending and receiving messages. Yet we can design a system like this and not realize that even it is subject to “natural law” (source of universal energy). But in realizing that the most expansive aspect of this creation is the intention for which it was created, and this “intention” is something that we share with our Creator.
I agree with you there. Science is finding out that Marijuana can be used for medicinal reasons. Fact in point… all plants (and things) that grow in the natural word have some sort of medicinal value to them, even poisons that they use in treating cancer.
Even some plants have amazing values to them such as a substance found in grapes that can suppress aging… a process supposedly mimicked by chemicals roused up by a gene called sir2. This sir2 triggers cellular changes, and along with ones mitochondria (which is turned on by exercise) can turn nutrients such as fat, into fuel for muscle cells. And it is these sir2 (sirtuin enzymes) that have been found to reverse the aging process. Interestingly, a specific chemical called “Resveratrol” is found in in the skin of both red and white grapes (and red wine) which is produced by the grapevine when it is stressed or pressured by disease such as fungal infections. When this chemical is ingested by humans or animals it turns on the gene sir2 (the sirtuin enzymes) which have been found to reverse the aging process.
Joseph, you are correct in your analogy about the Hebrew writing and language being the oldest! Hebrew is the predecessor of them all! I’ve done much research on this myself - years actually. What I’ve discovered is that all written language is a form of the Hebrew letters. In my book I illustrate all the written forms of writing back to the earliest suspected and reveal that throughout the centuries the Hebrew letters were copied in similarity and style but through its scattered usage, it became mottled, broken and disjunctive UNTIL IT WAS PROPERLY REVISED AGAIN BY G-D when Moses received the stone commandment tablets written by the finger of G-d. Explained and demonstrated in my book demo here:
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltruthpublisher.com/files/Pictures_and_explanation.pdf
A close examination of the similarities of worldwide alphabets reveals that at a given time in history we as humans spoke and wrote one language. Starting with the oldest “suspected” alphabets all the way to the present day, one can easily see the similarities in all these letters. From the earliest (suspected) time period of writing starting approximately 3,000 to 4,000 years ago, to the recent last 100 years. This includes all found writing from across the ENTIRE GLOBE! This also includes Cuneiform, Chinese, Mayan, and additionally Egyptian hieroglyphics which are pictographic.
I’ve already told you Spidergoat (and this goes for Alphanumeric too)… TRUE SCIENCE WILL ALWAYS SUPPORT G-D’S WORD!* It has gathered absolutely nothing when it cannot link science to that of religion. Science by itself can never tell us the origin of anything (namely G-d and the origin of all life), unless we take into the account of the Genesis account of Creation. What’s more the Bible appears to be the only book that gives any kind of logical answer for how life came about.
Therefore, the question still remains for why we should except the evolution model when the evidence cannot be produced? The Evolution Theory has no substantial evidence of having actually happened or is currently occurring in this day and age. Can we therefore safely say that the evolution theory is not actually based on science, but rather on a misguided faith since it consists mainly on a theory that has not been seen occurring or witnessed in nature or in any laboratory in the entire world. And we are allowing a theory that’s based on misguided faith to be the guiding mechanism of science.
Its only natural that we (humans) of course are even more curious about what lies beyond. Proverbs 25:2 - It is the glory of G-d to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. However even though it is humankinds inclination to search out matters, all space programs have become a colossal failure because it bypasses, ignores and rejects G-d. instead of reading, learning and applying what the Bible has to tell us about our origin, we are defiantly inquisitive to prove otherwise. In all the endeavors of every space program in the history of humankind that we have ever embarked on had discovered that the Moon is uninhabited as well as the planet Mars. There is no physical life on these bodies as they’ve proven themselves to be uninhabitable (we cant even find bacteria). But we didn’t have to go to the moon to find this information out because the Bible has already told us that the lunar origin of the moon was created by G-d in Genesis 1:16 - And G-d made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. Now I know that these are only two bodies that reside in our solar system, but if one wants the ultimate secret of where other planetary bodies in the universe came from or whether or not they are inhabitable or not, you cant resolve it through restricted and limited perspectives, or through experimental science, but only through THE WORD OF G-D. There is no doubt that mankind will continue searching despite the answer already being found in the Bible. There is a reason for this that G-d has intended… and in the end I firmly believe that science will conduct us, step by step, through the whole range of astronomy, until we arrive, at length, at G-d.
Synthesizer-patel,
Here is your answer… The whole world and every living thing in it is made up of information and energy - down to the molecules and subatomic particles.
But come to find out that subatomic particles are not really things either! They are actually only “fluctuations” of energy and information in a huge void, and when we look further beyond this point we see absolutely nothing!
So now what’s this “nothingness” from which we all come from?
Is it just an empty void?
No, it is the womb of G-d!
Is it possible, just vaguely possible for you to fathom in your minuscule mind that the natural world (as it was set up by G-d) goes to the same exact place to get the “information” that it needs to create all things in existence?
That alleged truism means that if science refutes your premise, it must not be science. The evidence for evolution is massive. It's not my fault if you don't want to see it.
Alphanumeric,
And so is yours! Answer me this question… where is the evidence that any of this (evolution) has ever happened?
My view is quite simple you see, it deals with something called “REALITY” (like-life coming from like-life), and this is something that the “Theory of Evolution” will never ever have.
Ok, so let me see, you must then obviously believe in the Drake Equation (which is a mathematical equation used to estimate the number of extraterrestrial civilizations that may exist in our galaxy) But let me let you in on a little fact that is still relevant today as it will be tomorrow. Firstly, there are explanations as to why the Universe appears to aged and this has to do with “light“. I can go into all of that if you would like - just let me know? Secondly, as to date, we have not found any other life in the Universe that we have observed so far. We haven’t even found a single valid bacteria on Mars. Not to mention that SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) has not received any genuine signal from our little grey alien friends yet. Now there might be rumors about such data, and alien encounters, even rumors of alien spaceships existing at area 51...
But can I ask you… where is any of this so called “real” evidence?
Its quite simple you know, it just doesn’t exist!
I’d be interested in your view "first" for the reason why thermodynamic doesn’t contradict evolution?
FYI, most of these religious texts have barrowed ideas from the Hebrew Bible. And no, the Hindu holy book is NOT older than the Hebrew Bible, and the same is true for the Koran (Quran). For example… Mohamed came later on in history and melded the two monotheistic religions of the day together which are Judaism and Christianity. He rewrote and adjusted them to his own narrative which can now be found in the Koran (known as Islam). Although here is the kicker in all this… according to the Moslem/Islamic tradition Mohamed took a ride on his divine horse (or angel) and flew at night from the Dome of the Rock mosque (located in Jerusalem) and ascended up to heaven. But it was originally (and ultimately) the Jewish tradition that told about the temple mount being the gates of heaven that enabled the Moslems “centuries later” to develop the tradition about Mohamed going up to heaven from that very spot. But in truth Mohamed never set a foot in the holy land or saw with his eyes the temple mount.
All you have is a book, as if that were reality.