Originally posted by Suzianne
(Pssssst... it's Scrabble™.)

Scrapple the grown-up version where you have to wrestle your opponent for each letter!

Originally posted by Suzianne
Sigh. Leave it to you to make me sorry I didn't follow my first idea to put "in the Bible" on the end of my sentence.

Hmmm.... I understood that you meant that (not sure what you think I thought what you meant). I just thought it was quite surprising coming from you.

"Everything we need to know has been laid out in the Bible."

Some time ago you said something to RJHinds about how evolution isn't mentioned in the Bible. But I don't think you're the type of person who feels evolution is not something we need to know. Which is why that line surprised me.

I wish I could find back that thread where you said that to RJ.

EDIT: found it http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=156084&page=1#post_3123212

Actually, I remembered it somewhat differently than it actually was. It wasn't about evolution at all.

Still... if it's not in the bible, we don't need to know? Really?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Hmmm.... I understood that you meant that (not sure what you think I thought what you meant). I just thought it was quite surprising coming from you.

"Everything we need to know has been laid out in the Bible."

Some time ago you said something to RJHinds about how evolution isn't mentioned in the Bible. But I don't think you're the type of perso ...[text shortened]... n't about evolution at all.

Still... if it's not in the bible, we don't need to know? Really?

Even the most die-hard atheist might agree that there is a world of difference between "Needing to know" and "having a 'need to know'", as in "this info is given out only on a 'need-to-know' basis."

No, I do not think evolution is something we have a 'need to know'. We all got along just fine before Darwin came along. But now that that specific jar is open, we can't exactly put it back in there.

This is like the age-old question of what God did to keep busy before He created our universe. Well, we are not told, because we do not exactly have a 'need to know'. We might want to know, but we do not have a need to know.

I still stand by my assertion that the Bible does not contain everything. Some things, we just do not have a 'need to know'. Granted, some of these things we eventually find out on our own. Some Christians say stupid things, like "oh yeah, how do you know that? it's not in the Bible." I say the Bible contains truth. I do not say it contains ALL truth.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Scrapple the grown-up version where you have to wrestle your opponent for each letter!

lol, that might prove even more interesting. 🙂

Originally posted by sonship
The point is speculation concerning that which is [b]true basically.

Scrapple is a decent word game to play. Try that for your entertainment.[/b]

MY point is that your post is written as if you are speaking factually, when in fact you are speculating. you should start your speculating sentences with things like 'i think that' or 'its my opinion that' or 'it could be that' and so on.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
MY point is that your post is written as if you are speaking factually, when in fact you are speculating. you should start your speculating sentences with things like 'i think that' or 'its my opinion that' or 'it could be that' and so on.

You should probably tutor googlefudge on this as well, then. Lately, he's been posting things like "the difference between 'God exists' and 'God doesn't exist' is that 'God doesn't exist' is a true statement and can be proven," (paraphrase) when it's actually just his opinion and can't even actually be proven.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Even the most die-hard atheist might agree that there is a world of difference between "Needing to know" and "having a 'need to know'", as in "this info is given out only on a 'need-to-know' basis."

No, I do not think evolution is something we have a 'need to know'. We all got along just fine before Darwin came along. But now that that specific jar is ...[text shortened]... ? it's not in the Bible." I say the Bible contains truth. I do not say it contains ALL truth.

You don't think we need to know about evolution?

Do you know how many lives have been, and are being, saved by medical treatments
developed using evolutionary theory?

Of course you do, you're not an idiot.


So do you think we don't have a need to get better at treating disease and making life
on earth better, longer, and healthier?

Originally posted by Suzianne
You should probably tutor googlefudge on this as well, then. Lately, he's been posting things like "the difference between 'God exists' and 'God doesn't exist' is that 'God doesn't exist' is a true statement and can be proven," (paraphrase) when it's actually just his opinion and can't even actually be proven.

Proven beyond a reasonable doubt is what I am saying, just for clarity.


And I am more than willing to discuss how it can be proven, but you run
away from that kind of debate.

Originally posted by Suzianne
You should probably tutor googlefudge on this as well, then. Lately, he's been posting things like "the difference between 'God exists' and 'God doesn't exist' is that 'God doesn't exist' is a true statement and can be proven," (paraphrase) when it's actually just his opinion and can't even actually be proven.

Can you prove that he doesn't have a proof?

Originally posted by Agerg
Can you prove that he doesn't have a proof?

Wa, hey up there...

She doesn't need to prove I don't have proof, it's up to me to prove that I do
as it's me making the claim.

No here problem is that she's claiming that it's not possible that I have proof.
That claim requires justification.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Wa, hey up there...

She doesn't need to prove I don't have proof, it's up to me to prove that I do
as it's me making the claim.

No here problem is that she's claiming that it's not possible that I have proof.
That claim requires justification.

Well the thing is - any theist (who didn't arrive at their position via valid logical or empirical evidence) claiming that we don't have a proof that "G"od doesn't exist should, at least for the sake of consistency, prove that we don't! Otherwise someone like me will just come along and say that they do have a proof (and that they have their reasons for not wanting to share it with the rest of the world); essentially stopping that favoured theist line of attack dead in its tracks.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Even the most die-hard atheist might agree that there is a world of difference between "Needing to know" and "having a 'need to know'", as in "this info is given out only on a 'need-to-know' basis."

No, I do not think evolution is something we have a 'need to know'. We all got along just fine before Darwin came along. But now that that specific jar is ...[text shortened]... ? it's not in the Bible." I say the Bible contains truth. I do not say it contains ALL truth.

As far as I'm aware cancer treatments, the dangers of virusses and bacteria and how to build a house (or at least somekind of shelter) are amongst the many things not mentioned in the bible.

These are all things we don't need to know? Should we find out about them along the way, fine, but there's no need to know.

Whereas knowing the relationship between Enoch and Lamech, is vital.

Is that it?

Originally posted by Agerg
Well the thing is - any theist (who didn't arrive at their position via valid logical or empirical evidence) claiming that we don't have a proof that "G"od doesn't exist should, at least for the sake of consistency, prove that we don't! Otherwise someone like me will just come along and say that they do have a proof (and that they have their reasons for not wa ...[text shortened]... rest of the world); essentially stopping that favoured theist line of attack dead in its tracks.

This is true.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
As far as I'm aware cancer treatments, the dangers of virusses and bacteria and how to build a house (or at least somekind of shelter) are amongst the many things not mentioned in the bible.

These are all things we don't need to know? Should we find out about them along the way, fine, but there's no need to know.

Whereas knowing the relationship between Enoch and Lamech, is vital.

Is that it?

Don't forget all those important rules for knowing how to keep your slaves...

Those are really vital.

Originally posted by Suzianne
You should probably tutor googlefudge on this as well, then. Lately, he's been posting things like "the difference between 'God exists' and 'God doesn't exist' is that 'God doesn't exist' is a true statement and can be proven," (paraphrase) when it's actually just his opinion and can't even actually be proven.

'god doesnt exist' is a true statement, so he's on solid ground, but if i catch him saying 'santa doesnt exist' during december ill be taking his fudgy ar se down.....as its 'i think santa doesnt exist' for a four week period only.