1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

"I have to use reason and science to debate with a man who does not understand the faith, and why not since science walks hand in hand with the bible? See below."
So you have no intention to learn anything nor question, only to use what ever you can find as a tool to win argument, in other words you are pedantic idiot.

"My perception of God is not contradictory because you can't understand Him. God never intended to completely reveal Himself to us now, but now we're back to a faith you don't want to embrace." go read the book of job and find out what happens to people who think they can parse the reasoning of god. you holier than thou faggot.

"Evolution is scientifically impossible for many many reasons," This is how you know something really really REALLY stupid is about to be said, and boy do you not disappoint.

" but the important reasons for you to know is that there could not have been a big bang without a big banger(a sudden injection of something into nothing)," has absolutely nothing to do with the theory of evolution, and shows you have no idea what you are talking about. once again showing you to be both stupid and uneducated.
The big bang is a term people like you invented, there was no bang, there wasn't anything that went bang, it was just a lot of stuff really close together a long long time ago, that has since been moving away from that point and going through its logical physical transformation dictated by pure physics. The term big bang was made up by faggots like you trying to discredit it. The name stuck because its faster to say than "the theory about how all the stuff in the universe was really hot and squished together once". That's literally the whole content of the theory, that we can tell that everything was all squished together once, and until something new in physics shows up, that will continue to be the theory going forward. I would like to reiterate that this is retarded and so are you.

"and also that DNA refuses to be altered. It is a closed circuit which has died each time scientists have attempted to mold it." we literally have genetically modified corn you crack head, we've been altering dna for like 40 years, the fuck you smoking. Now I know you have to be trolling, because if you believe this, it means you cant believe in the idea that weaponized viruses can be created in a lab, And that makes you glow. Speaking of which go look up glowing rats, we genetically modified all sorts of animals to glow in the dark.

"Claiming to know how everything came into existence through evolution is just a plain lie since evolutionary processes have been shown as impossible over and over as stated above." No they haven't. Not even once, especially not above. Retard.

"Oh and by the way, this is about truth, and I do consider everything you say. I study frequently and have noted the tremendous amount of insulting you've done to get your point across, which is unnecessary if you were really confident in your theology to work for you. Half of your response there was attacking my phrasing."
I've not insulted you to get a point across, I've insulted you because you are an idiot and I want you to stop being retarded. The only way I can think to tell you how stupid you are being is to repeatedly tell you that you are a retard for believing this garbage. Why didn't you note down the fact that you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about? Maybe you could go RESEARCH some of this from primary sources, instead of from a creation science website.

"Last thing...you agreed with me that something cannot come from nothing, and then said everything I say is wrong. For a man who's preaching logic, that is pretty illogical."
Here have yourself pedant point for being technically correct about something, without actually being correct about anything that mattered.

I think my favorite thing you've said so far was the thing about dna being impossible to edit, I actually laughed out loud at that. This is some straight up flat earther shit. God I hope you are a troll, and don't really believe this. Because if you are a troll, your a good one, and I'm proud to have been had by you. If not I pity you deeply.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

"We already agreed that faith was necessary for some things, and that is what you need to accept the reality of God"

Then stop trying to use logic. That was the point of my first post. If you believe it on faith use faith, and stop trying to push it into the domain of reasoning, the fundamental axioms of your religions beliefs and those of the scientific method are at odds with one another. One being no circular reasoning, and the minimization of fundamental axioms.

" If your perception of God was true, He wouldn't be a god at all, being limited as we are."
I have not spoken a single iota of my perception of god, only the perception you have given and how flawed and contradictory it is. The logical interactions of your beliefs makes god out as an impossibility, that is why Nietzsche famously decreed that Christianity died by its own hands. That the search for absolute truth engendered by biblical study and the importance of the logos lead to the scientific and philosophical revolutions that showed the belief system as untenable.

"But to answer your questions, yes I know this to be true because the bible says so and has not been proven wrong."
Perfect example of how you don't understand the concept of burden of proof. If you are gonna put these beliefs forward in logic, then you must show that it MUST be correct, not up to others to show that it CANT. we went through this already.

"Science also has provided more evidence to the existence of God and His creation than any evolutionary or atheistic theory since something cannot come from nothing."
If you believe that you are gravely mistaken. Science does say something cant come from nothing, and it does NOT make acceptations for deities. This makes your HYPOTHOSIS dead in the water, the word hypothesis here is important because of the next point.
Evolutionary THEORY is provably evidentially TRUE. That's what THEORY means in science. If it was unproven or under debate in anyway it would be called a HYPOTHOSIS. If you don't understand this basic definition then you don't understand how science works in the least, its the most basic premise taught in elementary science classes in a public school. Its less than bare minimum.

"Only God could do that. There is no other plausible explanation for the existence of this world since nobody can get past the sudden creation of matter out of nothing, including whatever 'scientific explanation' you cited four times without explaining."
Since you are stubbornly refusing to look it up yourself, here is my attempt at explaining what I know of it.
We can tell that things are moving away from one another generally, so logically they were closer together in the past, since we can map the physics of why this is happening, and cannot find a reason why it would have been different in the past, we can assume that the further back you go the closer together everything is.
By simulating the physics of what this process entails, with what we know so far of the subject, we can get far back enough to realize that everything was a hyper energy rich soup some point that we call "a few seconds after the big bang", but our current ability to map physics breaks down at this point, so we cannot get back to the point of the big bang itself, and can prove logically that "before the big bang" is unknowable since time and causality began at that point. Again we cannot completely map it all with our current gaps in physics knowledge, and to understand fully what humanity knows in total about it right now is basically a 10 year stint of focused study.
At that point though, it doesn't matter, because if we can logically bring it back to that point, we can put something like an age on the universe itself from what we know of physics, and physicists have placed an age of 13 or so billion years on that process from energy soup to now. That's many orders of magnitude more years than your desert religion states.

After this point, we have mapped out very very clearly and provably just about everything else that happened. From space dust, to you. Its known, with very few gaps in the knowledge we gathered, and the gaps shrinking and disappearing every day as we test more, and learn more.

From the short term history we know from geology and biology, to the long term knowledge we gained from astrophysics, right down to the base of logic structures at the bare base of mathematics, everything points to the creation story being nothing more than a story. We have found more logical explanations for creation of the land, for the formation of creatures, and the arrival of man.

EVERY SENTENCE IN YOUR SCREED IS WRONG.
EVERY
SINGLE
ONE.

And telling you about it is like a godamn research thesis, because you cant be arsed to just look into it yourself. Please, I want to stop now, I'm sorry it hurts or whatever, but your faith is not in the domain of scientific inquiry any more that morality is. That's just the way it is, I shouldn't even have to prove it to you, it just doesn't make any sense to put that which is based on faith into a category of thinking that requires the use of a very specific limited set of already codified axioms.

Do you understand now why so few people will debate on this? I basically have to teach you about the fundamentals of like 47 different things for you to even begin to grasp why you are so wrong. Your main arguments have thus far all been the same "well if you cant tell me about x subject, than..."

I realize now as I write this how foolish I was to respond to begin with. I've wasted a good day writing to someone who will never ever accept anything I say. For you this isn't about logic, or truth, its just about making yourself feel correct. You have no intention to learn anything, if you did, you'd just go study it. You don't know, or even care about how wrong you are, the point for you is defending your belief from what you imagine was an attack on it.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

And you know this how? Because the bible says so?
And you know the bible can be used as a form of evidence because its divinely inspired and accurate? And you know its accurate because the scientific explanation is wrong? (this is a fallacy in itself, as even if the scientific explanation were false, which its not, that wouldn't automatically prove your specific version of creation any more than it would prove a pagan creation story.)
And you know the scientific explanation is wrong because something cant come from nothing? (which is literally the opposite of what the scientific explanation is.)
But god in the bible comes from nothing, so isn't that a contradiction? OH NOOOOO because he's outside the laws of the earth. And you know this how? Because the bible says so?

Do you know what "begging the question" or "circular reasoning" is? My picture of god is fine. Yours is warped and corrupted.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

"something cant come from nothing, accept that time god came from nothing and then made everything else from nothing" What a massive faggot.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

Your bullshitting yourself to make it all go away, and that's very sad. What are you even trying to say here? That gen1 and 2 are separate events, one for the creation of everything and one for the creation of the garden? That cant be right unless man was made twice. If they are describing the same event, why tell one out of order? "oh I made all the trees everywhere, but then I changed my mind and decided to make trees and fish and birds in just this one spot because I didn't make all the ones I needed"
Why even tell the same event twice, if you are a being of prefect communication skill? If not the same one twice, why fuck up and have to make shit a second time? Its a major plot hole in every direction and you aren't able to explain it away, no one is. That's why biblical scholars accept that the king James accepted 2 different versions of the same story that were floating around in his attempt to unite the religions of his domain.

And for the second one you are like "no no no, what god actually means here is..." No. God means what he says, There should be no confusion of what sin is. In one he says the son will not bear the sin of the father, and then he says this particular sin is abhorrent enough that he goes back on that. either it means what it says, or it needs interpretation because it was written clearly and correctly, if you have to translate it, and figure out "what god really means" than by definition its imperfect.

Stop doing this, its sad, its pathetic, and its exactly what the leftists do that make me think they are insane. Shifting terms, changing definition, setting rules and then breaking them, belittling others who don't accept your word games. you are talking out of your ass, and making yourself look like an idiot. Any one seeing this who isn't squarely already in your camp can see you doing whatever you can do to feel like you are right regardless of how little sense you are making.

The bible stories are not real. Life was not created in 7 days, most of what existed died out totally long before a man ever existed. The earth is not flat with a dome over it with holes for stars, and endless waters above. If you add up all the ages of all the generations listed in the bible from creation until you get to Jesus, than add all the years since Jesus, you don't get enough years to account for the age of the oldest trees we've found. We have found anatomically modern human skeletons that are older than than by 100,000 years. we have written stories from other peoples that are so old they would have been written before the time the bible says the earth was created. The very idea that you could ACTUALLY believe that shit isn't just stupid, its devastating for any sane human being to realize anyone is actually dumb enough to believe the creation story as fact when we live in a world where almost everyone can read, and books are basically free.

You will get no further responses from me, you can either get it, or not.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why are you making me do your research for you? That's so lazy. I'll give you like one, since I'll have to find the verses and shit.

Genesis 1:11 "And God 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."
Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

so in genesis 1 god make trees first, and then later makes man.

Genesis 2:7 "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
2:8 "And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed."
2:9 "And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil."

And then in genesis 2 the story is retold for some reason, but this time with a different order, and man comes first.

Yes, I was in fact telling you a simple google search would prove me correct, because that's all I had to do to look up a list of references to contradictions. These have been known to biblical scholars for a thousand years. Here have another freebie since I'm already this far in.

Ezekiel 18:20 "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."
Exodus 20:5 "Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me/"

You can just take your bible, go to a list of contradictions, and then read the relevant passages yourself, and compare them. Of course if contradictions existing in the bible is a reasonable threat to your belief, you aint really getting the point of the thing.

If This fact continues to bother you, go do some research and watch some biblical lectures by biblical scholars on YouTube about the subject, they can explain much better than I why these exist, and why they aren't really that big a deal to the faith.

I put way to much work into my responses on this site.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm gonna have to go massive faggot mode on this one.

First of all, the bible contradicts itself in multiple places, and therefor cannot be 1)inerrant, 2)completely truthful, or 3)inspired by one who is infallible or incapable of confusion of lying. You can just google search for "Bible contradictions" and read literally pages and pages of examples.

Secondly, in all forms of logical thinking it is up to the one who makes a claim to prove it is true, not up to the one denying the claim to prove it is false, as there exist an infinitely many non disprovable statement.

"There are invisible and non corporeal pixies living in my teeth."
"i have a leprechaun in this box, but he will disappear forever when you try to look for him."
"i have magic socks that give me the power to know that my socks are magic."
"Time is an illusion and and you didn't exist before reading this sentence."
"Rocks have feelings but you cant tell because they are rocks."
"the real god actually came back last Tuesday and decided we were a lost cause after listening to a Biden speech and abandoned us forever."
Its actually quite the fun exercise thinking of un-disprovable hypothesis.

Thirdly: No this is not to say there is no value to believing, just that you should not play the logic game with its claims. Logic isn't what its about, because logic is a narrowly focused tool invented by humans to help us beat rocks together better. Logic cant tell you how to raise a child or if you should defend against tyranny. It cant tell you what a good person is, much less how to actually be one. Neither can it tell you how to deal with the death of a loved one, or how to react to betrayal. The best it can do is tell you what kind of rocks to beat together how many times to help with the tasks.

For problems such as these you need a deep narrative understanding of your life and actions and how they effect the narratives of others. To be able to conceptualize such things, it is required that you have an overarching narrative in which the narrative of your life and the lives of others takes place. A unifying narrative that makes your narrative and all others narratives mutually comprehensible to all involved.

In short, the very idea of Proving or disproving the Bible is nonsense. You might as well fact check your emotions, or try to make a mathematical theorem out of the Gettysburg Address.

Imagine if someone told you that "UM ACTUALLY... it wasn't 47 years but 48 and a half years before the speech, and not all of their forefathers came at the same time, and therefore its not true!" you'd call them a faggot and tell them go eat shit, the numbers aint what this shits about.

In short, you cant make a logic claim about this because you always get contradictions, but that's not the point of the thing. Believe it because you believe it, because you "know" its the right way to live.
I think this is called faith.

Thank you for coming to me ted talk.

2
LapineAgaric 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thank you so much! I didn't know about z-library, now I have a new source of self education!

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

hnnggg delicious knowledge, I love it. Got a recommendation for a book from which to learn more about the specifics of this subject? :D

12
LapineAgaric 12 points ago +13 / -1

Low energy black pilled doomerisms. This has been irking me for a while now, so heres a nice long rant to get it out of my system.

First we have "they always cheat, why try?" followed below by "yeah your right! lets put 'em in jail!"

But we don't put people in jail, the government does. Your gonna lock up the judges? nonsense on its face. You have to OWN the judges, or BE the judges if you want to dictate who is locked up.

And that right there is exactly why you must try regardless of how stacked against you the odds are. Among us are brave heroes, trying their hardest to mount the face of government and lance this rancid boil. Are you going to show them no support? No source to let them know "were here, we are behind you, even if we cant win." Are you really fine with laying down next time and just letting it happen with no effort on your part?

Well I'm not, I'm going to study who is running, their positions and morals. From the lowest parts of my city government to the highest levels of national office, and put my support behind those who need it. Not just to have a chance to win, but to let them know they are wanted. And then i'll watch, and note the goings on, make sure every hair out of place is notated and filed away as a form of evidence. Not just to prove to those in government, but those in the general populace of EXACTLY what's going on.

And please, spare me the posturing of how your gonna skip the ballot box and go for the ammo box. If you have no will to waste a few afternoons on reading about candidates, and driving out to put a mark on a piece of paper, there is no reason to believe you'd EVER have the guts to stand up and fight with weapons.

25
LapineAgaric 25 points ago +30 / -5

They will not be caught until evidence is too overwhelming to be contained without stressing their media machine. This evidence cannot be gathered if they are not forced to continually cheat.

If those who seek to bring these injustices to light are not present at the voting booth, what can be done? Who will document the the strange incidents at the polls, and the suspicious actions of the staff? What reason will our common adversary have to cheat? Is our spirit so broken that will resign ourselves to hovel in disparate corners of the internet, complaining of our misgivings to one another only?

If we do not have the strength of character or will required to push back against insurmountable odds, in the face of certain failure, then what right have we to say we will put boots on the ground, or fight to the death to protect our freedoms. Say that it isn't so frens, that any patriot would proclaim such things, and not so much as cast his ballot.

9
LapineAgaric 9 points ago +9 / -0

then the possible outcomes are "we gather info and evidence" or "we lose with nothing to show for it."

10
LapineAgaric 10 points ago +10 / -0

Hamilton's central banking system was dismantled before the war of 1812 if i recall correctly, i think under Andrew Jackson. It has been blamed as the reason we lost that war, as we could not finance our armies. The federal reserve was not created until the early 1900's, after all its detractors were killed on The Titanic. Its should also be noted that the Rockefellers and Rothchild's spear headed the creation of this institution and though had tickets and intended to go, sold those tickets and canceled the trip last minute.

24
LapineAgaric 24 points ago +25 / -1

possible outcomes based on voting or not voting:
We don't vote, and they cheat: No one can tell they cheated.
We don't vote and they don't cheat: They still win because the right wing voter base didn't vote.
We vote and they cheat: They might win, but more evidence and examples of strange "coincidences" are documented.
We vote and they don't cheat: We win.

Basic analysis of the possible outcomes seems to point to voting in force as an optimal strategy.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

18 months? The government and media have been doing this at least since JFK won when he wasn't supposed to.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is a classic game that has been played for thousands of years. The left is filled with twitter bots, agents and disinformation campaigns. This you can see clearly, but take no notice that the same type of infiltration takes place on the right. Remember election "week" , and all the Nazi posts?

Just as you see them, the left sees those infiltrators within our ranks in just the same manner. This locks both sides in a world view where they see complete insanity across the isle, and nothing but support behind them. This is the standard way those in power have manipulated the populace for their own gain for thousands of years. By playing both sides of these ideological wars they manufacture, they grow in power and wealth.

The "center" now is constructed mainly of those who see demons on every side, and are trying to just hold their lives together as this ideological war rages on trampling their lives under foot. You may notice the horrors of this war, but most of the world is occupied with just keeping their families, businesses, and communities from burning down and have neither time nor effort to spare on anything else.

For them, existence itself is burning, and they have no interest in screaming into the flaming winds.

2
LapineAgaric 2 points ago +2 / -0

abed from community dyed his hair white?

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +2 / -1

Ah this post is sure to garner positive attention on the maga movement. Im sure that some normie, who finding himself on the fence, and deciding to come here to see what its all about, would see this post and go "wow, I agree with that, these guys must be legit."

i tell ya h-what, this is how you convince the average joe to listen to our political grievances.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

the best part of this is how pepe seems to be reacting to the page itself.

3
LapineAgaric 3 points ago +3 / -0

Its been marked as youtube kids, so that no one can comment, this is done automatically against the uploaders will.

1
LapineAgaric 1 point ago +1 / -0

And some are a series of winged concentric circles filled with eyes and surrounded by flames.

3
LapineAgaric 3 points ago +3 / -0

orcas are meat eaters, you don't have to throw to many dead bodies over board before they realize where they can get a free meal.

view more: Next ›