2 edits
Originally posted by katpTo suggest that you or her has some "anything" that makes you better or worse
That is how she saw it. I have no need to trash her thoughts and she did not trash mine.
Are we not both the better off for not trashing the other one's thoughts, where we differ, but agree to disagree still with respect for each other as humans?
than another separates all. We are all equal in that we all share the same flaws
and strengths and we are all responsible for our own actions and way of life!
One of the things I dislike about belief systems such as hers is that it calls one
group inferior to another by "design" there is nothing anyone can do if they were
MADE THAT WAY all choices are null and void you are what you are. One of the
things man's science attempts to do is give us excuses for our behavior which
has nothing to do with our being responsible so we are not at fault.
From the time of Adam where he blamed Eve, to now where we blame the guns,
religion, political parties, nationality, whatever we use to excuse our bad behavior
we do to deflect it from taking responsibility for our actions and way of life. It just
isn't our fault, God made me do it is the cry of many and they will suffer for such
a lie when the truth is told.
Kelly
Kelly
"We are all equal in that we all share the same flaws
and strengths and we are all responsible for our own actions and way of life! "
We differ on how we handle reality. Jesus teachings changed my attitude to handle life. She choosed not to accept it. We don't think the one is better or worse because we don't share the same faith.
Kelly:
"It just
isn't our fault, God made me do it is the cry of many and they will suffer for such
a lie when the truth is told. "
I agree. Many people, prefer not to see the self lie. Faith don't take common sense away. In my cause my faith only changed my attitude of how I choose to live in each moment and I prefer not to trash people's thoughts. Other people don't trash other people's thoughts, naturally.
3 edits
Originally posted by KellyJay“...I'm quite sure you believe you know what WAS required, that is not the samething
I'm quite sure you believe you know what was required, that is not the samething
as knowing what was required.
kelly
as knowing what WAS required. ...”(my emphasis)
“WAS”? Why the past tense? what is logically required for part of an explanation is surely timeless i.e. the same logic works in past, present and future so I don't understand what you mean by this “WAS”. Do you think logic becomes invalid with time? I mean, does it “corrode” or what?
I said;
“IF water is essential for life THEN water is required for life to start”
(thus, by implication, this suggests the presence of water is logically required for part of the explanation of abiogenesis )
so far you have not given a counter argument to the above deduction.
If the above deduction is valid AND you agree with the premise ( which you did) then ONE thing that you CAN say about abiogenesis is that water must be present and that is not “just opinion” or “just guessing” but a LOGICAL deduction based on that premise and the above logical deduction.
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton"WAS"? Past tense is required, because that was when the beginning occured.
“...I'm quite sure you believe you know what WAS required, that is not the samething
as knowing what WAS required. ...”(my emphasis)
“WAS”? Why the past tense? what is logically required for part of an explanation is surely timeless i.e. the same logic works in past, present and future so I don't understand what you mean by this “WAS”. Do you th ...[text shortened]... “just guessing” but a LOGICAL deduction based on that premise and the above logical deduction.
What was true or present back then is not the same as we see today, unless you
know something I don't. You cannot look at a complex device like a CPU and
see it working, and know what happened to it to make it that way just by looking
at it! You can go to published works where people in the know tell you, but you
just looking at them you will get things wrong. So with the past and the universe
it is the same way, you can look at the material, see the various parts and notice
how they function; however, that does not give you a clear understanding on how
it was started, where everything came from, and why they are the way they are.
Kelly
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton"nope, I said it must have involved water. Do you deny that water would have to be present? If so, tell us how the required organic chemistry and the formation of the first cell-like structure could have happened without water. "
“...I'm quite sure you believe you know what WAS required, that is not the samething
as knowing what WAS required. ...”(my emphasis)
“WAS”? Why the past tense? what is logically required for part of an explanation is surely timeless i.e. the same logic works in past, present and future so I don't understand what you mean by this “WAS”. Do you th ...[text shortened]... “just guessing” but a LOGICAL deduction based on that premise and the above logical deduction.
Here is your full quote, you said it must have involved water and asked if I denied
it would I did to tell you how....
Either you are a little confused or something else. I'm not going to address water
for the reasons I have told you, you DO NOT KNOW what was required, you do not
know how it happened so your guesses by looking at what we see today are no
more than that, guesses.
Kelly
Originally posted by katpI never once said one was worth more or less than any other, I believe God loves
Kelly
"We are all equal in that we all share the same flaws
and strengths and we are all responsible for our own actions and way of life! "
We differ on how we handle reality. Jesus teachings changed my attitude to handle life. She choosed not to accept it. We don't think the one is better or worse because we don't share the same faith.
Kelly:
"It ...[text shortened]... trash people's thoughts. Other people don't trash other people's thoughts, naturally.
all of us equally so our worth according to God's love is a level playing field. I also
believe we are all sinners, so according to sin we are all at fault equally, this too
is a level playing field that does not put one group over another or any one person
over another. Jesus' teachings are life changing our salvation rests in Jesus not in
our own efforts or rightousness, so again within mankind a level playing field in
Jesus Christ. All of that flies in the face of various "X" makes one different than
any other, even our judgment against others comes with a warning that we are
all forgiven and if we judge another we will be judged by that same standard, we
have been forgiven for all, so we should forgive all for all that they have done too.
If we miss this great salvation it will not be because it was not offered to all.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJay“..."WAS"? Past tense is required, because that was when the beginning occured. ...”
"WAS"? Past tense is required, because that was when the beginning occured.
What was true or present back then is not the same as we see today, unless you
know something I don't. You cannot look at a complex device like a CPU and
see it working, and know what happened to it to make it that way just by looking
at it! You can go to published works where p ...[text shortened]... on how
it was started, where everything came from, and why they are the way they are.
Kelly
I thought we were on the subject of what is required in an explanation?
You are obviously talking about an entirely different subject.
Cannot see the relevance of the rest of your post because of this.
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJay“...I'm not going to address water
"nope, I said it must have involved water. Do you deny that water would have to be present? If so, tell us how the required organic chemistry and the formation of the first cell-like structure could have happened without water. "
Here is your full quote, you said it must have involved water and asked if I denied
it would I did to tell you how....
E pened so your guesses by looking at what we see today are no
more than that, guesses.
Kelly
for the reasons I have told you, you DO NOT KNOW what was required, ...”
that is OBVIOUSLY false. You have in effect already admitted that I DO KNOW at least ONE thing that is required!
You agreed that water is essential for life.
THEREFORE, for there to be ANY chance for abiogenesis to work, ONE of the minimum requirements is that water MUST be present!
I am totally mystified how it is you can disagree with this logical deduction! (unless you don't?)
OK, one step at a time, do you agree that:
IF
1, water is always accentual for life.
THEN
2, for there to be ANY chance for abiogenesis to work, ONE of the minimum requirements is that water MUST be present.
If you disagree with the above deduction then explain please exactly why it is 2, does NOT logically follow from 1, ?
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonI never agreed anything was required water included, but to make it easier on
“...I'm not going to address water
for the reasons I have told you, you DO NOT KNOW what was required, ...”
that is OBVIOUSLY false. You have in effect already admitted that I DO KNOW at least ONE thing that is required!
You agreed that water is essential for life.
THEREFORE, for there to be ANY chance for abiogenesis to work, ONE of the minim ...[text shortened]... e above deduction then explain please exactly why it is 2, does NOT logically follow from 1, ?
both of us I'm just going to quit worring about your questions as you have mine.
We are done, at least on this thread.
Kelly
"Rubbish
Kelly"
You trashed an an atheist opinion.
Kelly:
"I never once said one was worth more or less than any other, I believe God loves
all of us equally so our worth according to God's love is a level playing field."
Kelly:
"If we miss this great salvation it will not be because it was not offered to all."
I only know how God saved me. I don't know what He does for other people. I have come to the conclusion in believing: I can not make people believe in the way I do and then send them to hell if they don't. I can only show them what works for me.
And to trash people's opinions because they don't believe like I do, helps nobody to any salvation.
1 edit
Originally posted by katpIdeas if they are bad should be trashed, people I try to avoid trashing.
"Rubbish
Kelly"
You trashed an an atheist opinion.
Kelly:
"I never once said one was worth more or less than any other, I believe God loves
all of us equally so our worth according to God's love is a level playing field."
Kelly:
"If we miss this great salvation it will not be because it was not offered to all."
I only know how God saved me eople's opinions because they don't believe like I do, helps nobody to any salvation.
With respect to God saving you, I'm not sure what you are talking about. Are you
not saved the same way everyone else is?
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJay“...I never agreed anything was required water included, ...”
I never agreed anything was required water included, but to make it easier on
both of us I'm just going to quit worring about your questions as you have mine.
We are done, at least on this thread.
Kelly
page 12 of this thread, third post from the bottom:
“Life cannot exists without water “ (your quote)
so, therefore, you must agree that for there to be ANY chance for abiogenesis to work, ONE of the minimum requirements is that water MUST be present...right?
“...I'm just going to quit worring about your questions as you have mine. ...”
I have answered all your questions. I challenge you to show me just ONE question that you have asked me that I haven't answered!!!!
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton"Life cannot exists without water does not address how or where it started."
“...I never agreed anything was required water included, ...”
page 12 of this thread, third post from the bottom:
“Life cannot exists without water “ (your quote)
so, therefore, you must agree that for there to be ANY chance for abiogenesis to work, ONE of the minimum requirements is that water MUST be present...right?
“...I'm just going ...[text shortened]... challenge you to show me just ONE question that you have asked me that I haven't answered!!!!
The full quote! It states that life cannot exist without water does not address
how or where it started, nothing about that statement says I'm saying life
cannot exist without water only that it doesn't address the point. You were the one
bringing up water not me my only point was you do not know how or why life
started and since you do not know you have no reason to say God was not
required or for that matter anything else....You do not know! So when ever you
claim you can leave something out of the equation, you do so out of your beliefs
about the beginning nothing more, certainly not logic.
Kelly
Originally posted by katpPeople are saved getting a right relationship with God through Jesus Christ. I'm
How was everybody else saved, Kelly? Accepting the Bible as the only word of God?
not sure what your views are on that topic, much less why you brought up people
must accept the Bible. The 'Bible' has only been around for a few hundred years,
does that mean that everyone who lived and died before the Bible was compiled
were not saved? Not denying the Bible is the Word of God, but even in that
statement there are so many questions you are bringing into this discussion.
Kelly