Let The Debate Begin: EVOLUTION VS CREATIONISM

[muldoon]

Sure I was/am a scumbag early on. But you seem to be calling me out for what I am, a sinner, when I've already admitted to being one. What you haven't done is admit that you are a sinner yourself. Dont tell me that you dont have any dirt on you or things you keep in the closet hidden from others, things youve done in the past that have hurt others, because we all do. I just chose to let mine out for you all to hear because I'm no longer ashamed of it because its in my past. There is hope for all of us. Even you.

If it's in your past, why use "was/am"?

I prefer not to use the cop out of "sinner". Either you break the law (steal), purposely target married women (scumbag) or not. Sin is a pretty all encompassing "oh I looked with envy upon" with "I didn't obey my parents" to golden calves to murder.

Sounds like you're basically using Jesus as a fall back insurance policy on your chosen lifestyle with the hopes that you won't burn for it. And if that weren't enough, you offer advice to others ("I mean..really read the bible") as some sort of testament on how to find the path.

How about change that was/am to just "was" instead of trying to be this font of salvation for others who haven't chosen to look to the sky to explain why they shouldn't steal and fu** people over?

[PhillyFlyers]

BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER IN THIS THREAD.......

CAN I PLEASE HAVE MY QUESTION ANSWERED?


1. Most evolutionists accept the big bang theory for the origins of the universe and of life here on earth, so my question to them is this....

How did a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organize themselves into the first living cell?

[muldoon]

You are an extremist. You've exposed yourself for who you are. A mean, nasty, self-loving individual with militant anti-religious/anti-semite views incapable of discussing such a topic with others that hold beliefs other than your own.

So, a sinner...no better or worse than the rest of us?

[SharkAA]

Reading a story here and there is like reading a chapter here and there out of any other book. I don't ask you or anyone to read it thinking its real. When I picked it up, I wanted to read it just to have a better understanding of what Christianity is about and to solidify my atheist views. I'm working on the Koran right now because I want a better understanding of why muslims believe what they do and how it all ties into God. I guess I'm just fascinated with why millions and millions of people adhere to a certain faith instead of mocking it without any real knowledge of it.

The bible is full of stories and parables. It can be difficult to understand, but this is how people wrote back then because stories were passed down through oral communication before people could read or write. I wont say that things never changed down the line or that stories never got skewed or exaggerated. Theres a lot of evidence that points towards it. But when you look at the underlying message, the meaning of the stories, you will see what God is telling you and that the moral of the story stays the same.

The new testament is also totally different than the old. Many people who start reading the bible start reading the Old and think its crap before ever getting to the new testament. It is one bible, but the two testaments are very different books. If you want to study Judaism, go ahead an start with the Old testament. But if you are trying to reach a conclusion on Christianity, you should really start with the New.

Again, it's your choice, what you believe in. Personally, I don't recognize Bible as something I could look up to, nor do I allow myself for religion to become part of my life/beliefs. I am aware, what values/principles Christianity promotes, but then again, an average atheist can discover different, better values/principles through his life. I don't believe in God, because it's existence can never be proven and besides that, almost every person has it's own 'God'. Last, but not least, there has been an abuse of Christianity going on for centuries by Catholic Church. One example: an abortion isn't mentioned ONCE in the Bible, yet Catholic Church preaches bullshyt like it is a murder.

[Footy4Jesus]

...... but still fight those urges today.

You could just choose not to be a criminal, get treatment for your addictions.........

I guess choosing a posting handle with the name Jesus in a gambling forum part of your path.

Yeah I do still fight those urges. As long as we are on this earth in the midst of a spiritual battle where the devil will fight and do anything for your soul, we will always be tempted to do evil. When you've allowed the devil to become a part of you for such a long period in your life, you fall deeper into his hands. Committing more crime, more evil, he doesn't care what it is as long as its the wrong way to live. When you finally turn away from that lifestyle, it isn't easy but it gets easier everyday you fight the good fight.

I could try to "choose" to not be a criminal, but that takes a change of heart. Something that cannot be done on your own. You can try all you want to do it yourself, but you will fail. You need Gods help to get your life turned around. All you have to do is ask. Easier said then done for many people even though the act of asking is pretty simple. Pride gets in the way.

Could I get treatment for my addictions? Sure, and I do. But I will tell you that nothing has been more powerful and a saving grace to me than reading the bible, applying its scripture to my life, and going to church and surrounding myself with good people of faith. No prescription,psych visit, or therapy group has came even close to helping me the way giving my life to God has.

Now as for my sportsbetting. Ive pondered this question and get asked about it from time to time. Is gambling a sin? The answer I have come to after much searching and prayer is that it depends. There is nowhere in the bible that specifically says gambling is sinful. The act of casting lots can be found in numerous places. What it comes down to is whatever outcome happens, it was already in the lords hands. When a team scores in the last second to make your parlay a loser, it wasnt bad luck, it was already Gods fate that it would happen. So I do not believe in luck, its unbiblical. Although the bible does not specifically outline gambling as sinful, the love of money is. We are not to put money or anything else above God in our lives. If you are trying to get rich gambling, this is not good in Gods eyes. God rewards hard work. Those who work to make a living are doing the right thing, not sitting around trying to win a few bets to make a living. Alcohol is also not sinful in itself, but the abuse of it is. When you start to become obsessed with something like gambling, drinking, your work & making money, or any hobby you may have, it starts to wreak havoc on your life, your family, your finances, etc. Keeping a good perspective on your priorities in life are important and that means keeping God first. I like wagering on games, I love watching games. Can it be addictive yes. Keeping this in mind I make sure I spend time with God everyday and make time for my family and school and other things first. I've kept the same bankroll I've used for years and wager more for my entertainment. I find it fun. Because I never bet the farm trying to get rich by being greedy, my small losses don't bother me one bit. There is nothing wrong with having hobbies. God wants us to have fun and enjoy this life he has given you, but he also doesn't want you to ignore him for something else.

[Footy4Jesus]

So, a sinner...no better or worse than the rest of us?

Yes you are correct! We all fall short of the glory of God. We all struggle and often in different ways from one another, but the end result is the same if we don't come to God. Although lucullus has been pretty offensive, it would be un-Christian of me to not forgive him. There is hope for all of us. If we all just showed the brotherly love to one another that Jesus talked about.

[lucullus]

You have no facts in this thread just a bunch of hogwash. Your points are stupid and mistaken.

Dont you guy's love how christian's view science as stupid and mistaken. Same song different singer

[lucullus]

As early as CE 430, the Church leaders declared heresy punishable by death. In CE 906, "The Canon Episcopi" was the first Church body to expressly forbid the use of witchcraft.⁵ Before the Inquisition was fully underway, the Church accepted heretics back into the fold, under terms it considered reasonable. The following is an example:

For three Sundays, the heretic was stripped to the waist and whipped from the entrance of the town/village all the way to the church door. He/she was to permanently deny him/herself meat, eggs, and cheese except on Easter, Pentecost and Xmas, when he/she is to eat of them as a sign of his/her penance. For twenty days, twice a year he/she was to avoid fish and for three days in each week fish, wine and oil, fasting, if his/her health would permit.
He/she was to wear monastic vestments with a small cross, sewn on each breast. He/she was to hear mass daily. Seven times a day, he/she was to recite the canonical hours and in addition, at Paternoster ten times each day and twenty times each night.
He/she was to observe total abstinence from sex. Every month he/she was to report to a priest who was to keep the heretic under close observation. He/she was to be segregated from the rest of the community.

⁶ The Dark Side of Christian History by Helen Ellerbe, page 77

[lucullus]

You are an extremist. You've exposed yourself for who you are. A mean, nasty, self-loving individual with militant anti-religious/anti-semite views incapable of discussing such a topic with others that hold beliefs other than your own.

More hypocrisy.

[Kaabee]

i believe that lucullus is God, for he has done the impossible. he's found something more annoying than writing in all caps. i mean cap's.

[JayHorne3]

So all the fact's and historical happening's I have stated are simply slander and "extremist view points". The source of my knowledge comes from mainstream knowledge outlet's that even a common person know's. You and the two other christian/jew's in this thread choose to ignore the fact's because you are pursuing a pro-jewish religion agenda.

I challenge you to research into the validity of all the point's and fact's I have stated in this thread. None of you have offered a reasonable rebuttable based on historical fact or scientific and I doubt you will, because your type adds nothing of value to the world, being mental midget's or jew's.

All three of you have done the same thing thus far - disseminating garbage, lies, hypocrisy, and distorted statement's, it reflects who you guy's are as people. It is no coincidence you are follower's of god/jewsus.

Dude, you do not even know my religion but now I fall into your category of a 'crazy nut' based on the fact I challenged you to make a useful argument. That shows enough about you to stop any argument in it's tracks because it is useless to argue someone like you. So just in case you try yet again to ask someone to challenge your statements. Here goes...

"Old religion was exactly what i have said above, evolution of the inner body to become a god your self."

What old religion? I can only decipher that you are refering to Hinduism. However, religion was evident before our ancestors began writing in the pre-historic age. There is evidence of Neanderthal burial rituals that point to relgious beliefs and the afterlife. What point is the inner body evolution once the body has deceased? The earliest writtings clearly indicate that people of Mesopotamia, Minoan and Egyptian civilizations all had evidence of religions that supported supernatural gods. So your claim that old religion was not directed towards a higher power, is once again ridiculous.

"The fact is that the tenants of there religion tell you to be poor, worship a sadist, be a jew's slave, race mix, and a large assortment of unnatural things."

Again, what the hell are you talking about. No religion tells you to be poor? If you are speaking of Christianity, I can only imagine that you are distorting the notions where the bible refers to material possessions as being worthless and motivation for material things above obidience to god is unacceptable. Religion does not tell you to be poor. Worship a sadist? That's a stretch. Again you are giving no explanation yet again (wonder why?). But if you are speaking of the Christian god being a sadist, I would assume you are speaking of the fact that a perfect god could not create imperfect beings, hence the creation of sin. Still who makes the law of perfection? Seems much more philosophical than factual does it not? In fact I would argue that god did not "create" sin at all. Sin is just disobidience from god. God did not create the action that sin is describing, humas did.... Be a Jew's slave?? - please don't tell me that is your interpretation of scripture. Again I can only assume that is another distortion.

Millions of people were tortured and killed. They were forced into pledging allegiance to it, as previously stated


Forced into pledging allegiance to it??? Christians were persecuted by the Romans as early as the first century following Christ's resurrection. Yet you are claiming that everyone was forced to pledge to the Bible? It was quite the opposite just for the Bible to be created. If your kind would have had their way, the message of Christ would have never made it past the first centuries of the new age. Then you claim millions and millions people were tortured and killed. The same was the case for the earliest Christians, of course not in the millions category as I am narrowing to a specific time compared to your throughout history claim. Still the fact is, people have died because of wars started for thousands of reasons, yet people want to blame religion for it. Wars have been started over spices, gold, slavery, adultery, and etc before Christianity ever existed. It is only natural that an even so big and important as the meaning of life, would have contributed to so many conflicts and wars. Yet you blame it all on God, he did not create the arguments. Humans did, just as you and I are arguing here about our beliefs which have caused wars in the past. That cannot be accredited to god, if it can then you must also give him credit for the simple fact of allowing you another attempt to humiliate yourself with more lies that you have filled this thread with.

So again, I am challenging each one of your very vague claims to which you have not justified in any means. Hopefully you can let everyone know here exactly what you are trying to say. Then again I am sure you will just claim religious nut, crazy, etc as it is the easiest way for the incapable to discredit facts.

[muldoon]

Yeah I do still fight those urges. As long as we are on this earth in the midst of a spiritual battle where the devil will fight and do anything for your soul, we will always be tempted to do evil. When you've allowed the devil to become a part of you for such a long period in your life, you fall deeper into his hands. Committing more crime, more evil, he doesn't care what it is as long as its the wrong way to live. When you finally turn away from that lifestyle, it isn't easy but it gets easier everyday you fight the good fight.

Therein lies the great difference. You externalize blame by using the "devil" as your reason for acting how you do (or did).

Responsibility. Some take it. Others take the easy road and blame a mythical figure.

[Footy4Jesus]

If it's in your past, why use "was/am"?

Sin is a pretty all encompassing "oh I looked with envy upon" with "I didn't obey my parents" to golden calves to murder.

Sounds like you're basically using Jesus as a fall back insurance policy on your chosen lifestyle with the hopes that you won't burn for it.

How about change that was/am to just "was" instead of trying to be this font of salvation for others who haven't chosen to look to the sky to explain why they shouldn't steal and fu** people over?

I used was/am because Im not trying to say that Im all perfect now because that would be a lie. People often don't talk about their shortcomings for fear of being ostracized by others pretending to be better them. I know that everyone has their own secrets, but once someone opens up about theirs they seem to get pointed out for being weak. Call me a thief, a sinner, a scumbag thats all great because I wouldnt argue with you. Without Gods grace there would be no hope for me or anyone else. You'd be a thief, sinner, scumbag and there would be no hope for you that's all you could be. I dont need to gain acceptance from you or any other man and you dont need to either. my trust is put in the Lord.


I dont use Jesus as some sort of fallback insurance policy. There are many Christians who do this living a sinful life thinking that because they believe in Jesus everything will be rosey when they die and get to heaven. Jesus didn't just say to believe in him, but to follow him. To try to be more like him. An impossible thing to do because we are not God, but we are still to strive for it.

[lucullus]

You still fail to do any research of your own on my many factual claims, but yet again bring up the fairy tale of the bible to support your people (jews). Again, you say a whole lot of nothing like your jewish friends here.

[lucullus]

Quoting from the bible;

Exodus 15:3
The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

Deuteronomy 2:33
And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people.
2:34
And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain.

Deuteronomy 7:23
But the LORD thy God shall deliver them unto thee, and shall destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they be destroyed.
7:24
And he shall deliver their kings into thine hand, and thou shalt destroy their name from under heaven: there shall no man be able to stand before thee, until thou have destroyed them.

Numbers 25:16
And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
25:17
Vex the Midianites, and smite them

[Footy4Jesus]

Therein lies the great difference. You externalize blame by using the "devil" as your reason for acting how you do (or did).

Responsibility. Some take it. Others take the easy road and blame a mythical figure.

We were all given free will by God, so whatever choices you make are your own. I don't put blame on the devil for my own actions, but on myself for following his deceptive lead that ends in ruin. We will all one day be held responsible for which path we chose, but in this life its never too late to turn back around if you've been walking down the wrong one.

[lucullus]

Psalms 137:9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

I Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Luke 19:27
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
- Jesus of Nazareth, ordering others to commit murder.

Im the militant one? Some one did not do there research. These quote's alone show how these three christian poster's have been disseminating false information. This is how they all are.

[Footy4Jesus]

You, like many others, love to take a single scripture out of the bible and use it to misinterpret the passage. If you actually read what the scripture its referring to and the whole story behind it, it all of a sudden has a different meaning than when you use it alone. God is our father. He shows love and compassion for his children but he is also slow to anger. This doesn't mean he wont punish those that go against his will, though.

[lucullus]

Firstly, it is not a single scripture, but a plethora right in front of your eyes. I keep having to correct you like you are a little child, because you truly are a mental midget as all religious people are. Another poor explanation that sound's like some thing an up and coming preacher would say.

[lucullus]

Another petty explanation in defense of the criminals. These boys are lost.

[SamDiamond]

Here's the best part.

Philly is a catholic-- Has a hard on for all things Italian.

And it is an Italian priest who describes the catholic church's position on evolution.

And the Vatican already has given the official position that Darwin's theory on Evolution is compatible with christianity.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The Vatican claims Darwin's theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity

The Vatican has admitted that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution should not have been dismissed and claimed it is compatible with the Christian view of Creation.


Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, said while the Church had been hostile to Darwin's theory in the past, the idea of evolution could be traced to St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas.

Father Giuseppe Tanzella-Nitti, Professor of Theology at the Pontifical Santa Croce University in Rome, added that 4th century theologian St Augustine had "never heard the term evolution, but knew that big fish eat smaller fish" and forms of life had been transformed "slowly over time". Aquinas made similar observations in the Middle Ages.

Ahead of a papal-backed conference next month marking the 150th anniversary of Darwin's On the Origin of Species, the Vatican is also set to play down the idea of Intelligent Design, which argues a "higher power" must be responsible for the complexities of life.

The conference at the Pontifical Gregorian University will discuss Intelligent Design to an extent, but only as a "cultural phenomenon" rather than a scientific or theological issue.

Monsignor Ravasi said Darwin's theories had never been formally condemned by the Roman Catholic Church, pointing to comments more than 50 years ago, when Pope Pius XII described evolution as a valid scientific approach to the development of humans.

[JayHorne3]

You still fail to do any research of your own on my many factual claims, but yet again bring up the fairy tale of the bible to support your people (jews). Again, you say a whole lot of nothing like your jewish friends here.

Obviously you sir fail to have the intellect to have a reasonable debate. I posted in my response, I can only assume what you are trying to say as you simply threw out random statements that were not based on fact. When I challenge those claims, with actual facts, you then turn towards the Bible which again was assumption based on your own accord. Here lies the problem, you have not defended one of the arguments I responded to and have switched to a different subject entirely. If you are going to have the attention span of a 4th grader, I or nobody else is going to be able to discuss anything of significance with you on an intelligent level. But I am sure you will result to your mental midget comments, which justies my point that you can not hold your weight in this argument. The funny things is, I am not even saying the side you believe in is not correct. I am just point out the obvious that you do not need to be the spokesman of the evolution party

[Footy4Jesus]

Firstly, it is not a single scripture, but a plethora right in front of your eyes. I keep having to correct you like you are a little child, because you truly are a mental midget as all religious people are. Another poor explanation that sound's like some thing an up and coming preacher would say.

You just don't stop with the insults do you? If you wish to be taken seriously as an intelligent individual, you should try to refrain from lowering yourself to such a level.

They are singular scriptures taken from many parts of the bible. What I am saying is that you cannot take a single verse and make too much out of it without reading the entire passage. But this is too much work for some people and want to come to radical conclusions without doing their research. Its the same as taking any one sentence out of a whole conversation. The sentence can sound totally racist, hateful, perverse, whatever, if you don't know what it is relating to which can be totally harmless. Also keep in mind that scripture was translated from Hebrew and Greek language. Anyone who speaks a second language knows that it can be difficult or impossible to make a literal translation from one to another. This is why there is a book called Strongs Concordance which is a very useful tool when studying scripture. I'm not going to go through one-by-one all of the verses you put up here. I'm not your minister, and you should really read it for yourself.

[lucullus]

You say that these common, public facts are actually falsehoods and that these facts that we are discussing on this subject are random statement's. These loons operate in a completely different world. He is now trying to hide the fact that he is a jew or christian by saying that I assumed he is either of them, when it is glaringly apparent by his posts that he is.

[lucullus]

You just don't stop with the insults do you? If you wish to be taken seriously as an intelligent individual, you should try to refrain from lowering yourself to such a level.

They are singular scriptures taken from many parts of the bible. What I am saying is that you cannot take a single verse and make too much out of it without reading the entire passage. But this is too much work for some people and want to come to radical conclusions without doing their research. Its the same as taking any one sentence out of a whole conversation. The sentence can sound totally racist, hateful, perverse, whatever, if you don't know what it is relating to which can be totally harmless. Also keep in mind that scripture was translated from Hebrew and Greek language. Anyone who speaks a second language knows that it can be difficult or impossible to make a literal translation from one to another. This is why there is a book called Strongs Concordance which is a very useful tool when studying scripture. I'm not going to go through one-by-one all of the verses you put up here. I'm not your minister, and you should really read it for yourself.

In reference to these two quotes;

Psalms 137:9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

I Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

This man is saying that a story needs to go along with killing woman and children.

[lucullus]

These men continually ignore the facts about what they are supporting and in turn replace it with smoke and mirror type statements, adding nothing constructive to the subject but continuing to slander passive aggressively, and also inserting lie's into these attacks. Nothing they have said can be confirmed in the common knowledge of the masses, while my arguments are the opposite.

We know that these men are only delaying the inevitable fall of there intellectual criminal cabal they call the clergy, along with all of it's uncivilized and deceitful programs of deceit.

[lucullus]

I have included sources for these facts in a plethora of my posts in this thread. It is your choice to ignore them and than tell the tall tale that I am "throwing out random statement's not based on fact"

The truth hurts, especially for these religious loony toons.

[packerd_00]

Here's the best part.

Philly is a catholic-- Has a hard on for all things Italian.

And it is an Italian priest who describes the catholic church's position on evolution.

And the Vatican already has given the official position that Darwin's theory on Evolution is compatible with christianity.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The Vatican claims Darwin's theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity

The Vatican has admitted that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution should not have been dismissed and claimed it is compatible with the Christian view of Creation.


Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, said while the Church had been hostile to Darwin's theory in the past, the idea of evolution could be traced to St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas.

Father Giuseppe Tanzella-Nitti, Professor of Theology at the Pontifical Santa Croce University in Rome, added that 4th century theologian St Augustine had "never heard the term evolution, but knew that big fish eat smaller fish" and forms of life had been transformed "slowly over time". Aquinas made similar observations in the Middle Ages.

Ahead of a papal-backed conference next month marking the 150th anniversary of Darwin's On the Origin of Species, the Vatican is also set to play down the idea of Intelligent Design, which argues a "higher power" must be responsible for the complexities of life.

The conference at the Pontifical Gregorian University will discuss Intelligent Design to an extent, but only as a "cultural phenomenon" rather than a scientific or theological issue.

Monsignor Ravasi said Darwin's theories had never been formally condemned by the Roman Catholic Church, pointing to comments more than 50 years ago, when Pope Pius XII described evolution as a valid scientific approach to the development of humans.

Philly thinks he's a Roman,the guys a fruit cake.

[Footy4Jesus]

Its been interesting trying to debate with you, lucullus, but its a waste of time since you cannot respect me nor my faith. I dont have a problem with you having an opposing view, but your constant bullying and racism has me turned off. Millions of Jews died not only in WW2 but many wars before that. And millions died defending people that may have a different faith than their own. Its disgusting that anti-semitism still runs rampant in the world and probably will continue until this world ends. The world needs a scapegoat and the Jews are it it seems. Theres no use for me trying to help you. You are so lost in your hatred of others you would rather continue to lie to yourself than face the truth. I will continue to pray for you. Have a good day lucullus. God loves you.

[Bruce Norris]

Dont you guy's love how christian's view science as stupid and mistaken. Same song different singer

FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THINGS HOLY OR UNHOLY OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO BELIEVE IN... PLEASE STOP USING APOSTROPHES.

Fact's. Happening's. Loser's. Those are just a few of many. Reading through this thread, you resort to name calling and have this "I'm so smart" attitude yet you can't grasp simple grammar from the 1st grade.

[PhillyFlyers]

As early as CE 430, the Church leaders declared heresy punishable by death. In CE 906, "The Canon Episcopi" was the first Church body to expressly forbid the use of witchcraft.⁵ Before the Inquisition was fully underway, the Church accepted heretics back into the fold, under terms it considered reasonable. The following is an example:

For three Sundays, the heretic was stripped to the waist and whipped from the entrance of the town/village all the way to the church door. He/she was to permanently deny him/herself meat, eggs, and cheese except on Easter, Pentecost and Xmas, when he/she is to eat of them as a sign of his/her penance. For twenty days, twice a year he/she was to avoid fish and for three days in each week fish, wine and oil, fasting, if his/her health would permit.
He/she was to wear monastic vestments with a small cross, sewn on each breast. He/she was to hear mass daily. Seven times a day, he/she was to recite the canonical hours and in addition, at Paternoster ten times each day and twenty times each night.
He/she was to observe total abstinence from sex. Every month he/she was to report to a priest who was to keep the heretic under close observation. He/she was to be segregated from the rest of the community.

⁶ The Dark Side of Christian History by Helen Ellerbe, page 77

Helen Ellerbe is a secularist jew. I thought you didn't listen to jews? So you're a hypocrite.

Also, how is it that you are taking something from the past and judging it by today's standards?

It's a good thing the Church forbade witchcraft. It should always be illegal on the same par as devil worshiping.

Furthermore, Protestants also forbade witchcraft not just the Church. Take a look at the Salem Witch Trials of Colonial Massachusetts.

[PhillyFlyers]

1. Most evolutionists accept the big bang theory for the origins of the universe and of life here on earth, so my question to them is this....

How did a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organize themselves into the first living cell?

[muldoon]

1. Most evolutionists accept the big bang theory for the origins of the universe

Where is your proof that most accept the theory? Was there ever an actual formal survey of the 2 theories being co-believed by most?

The lack of a witness to abiogenesis does not disprove the theory of evolution.

You seem to want to challenge those who believe the best theory is evolution, with needing to explain the theory of the big bang.

You'll believe all the stories of Noah and the Ark, Adam & Eve, talking snakes, life in a big fish etc - all without a shred of real proof. Virgin births, back from the dead...raising the dead...yet no proof - no way to explain how things (virgin birth) created something from nothing - yet you want this same proof applied to others?

All that is explained with your magic man in the sky. But you want something that occurred most likely billions of years ago (or 6000 years ago in your world) to be explained from an eye witness standpoint?

Things only 200 years ago that we take for granted, would make us Gods to anyone from that era with incredible power of persuasion (aircraft, antibiotics etc).

You stay put and cling to your bronze age beliefs. Others choose to advance.

[PhillyFlyers]

Where is your proof that most accept the theory? Was there ever an actual formal survey of the 2 theories being co-believed by most?

The lack of a witness to abiogenesis does not disprove the theory of evolution.

You seem to want to challenge those who believe the best theory is evolution, with needing to explain the theory of the big bang.

You'll believe all the stories of Noah and the Ark, Adam & Eve, talking snakes, life in a big fish etc - all without a shred of real proof. Virgin births, back from the dead...raising the dead...yet no proof - no way to explain how things (virgin birth) created something from nothing - yet you want this same proof applied to others?

All that is explained with your magic man in the sky. But you want something that occurred most likely billions of years ago (or 6000 years ago in your world) to be explained from an eye witness standpoint?

Things only 200 years ago that we take for granted, would make us Gods to anyone from that era with incredible power of persuasion (aircraft, antibiotics etc).

You stay put and cling to your bronze age beliefs. Others choose to advance.

The big bang theory is the one most ascribed to among secularists.

From Wiki:

The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model for the early development of the Universe.

So, basically what you're really saying is that you can't answer my question.

You want to talk no proof?

Evolution has no proof of anything it claims.

You believe in a fairy tale called Evolution.

You think a group of apes somehow magically transformed themselves into humans and you have the nerve to say I believe in a magic man in the sky?

The Bible, specifically the book of genesis, answers all of the most basic questions we have.

Where do we come from?

How did we get here?

How did we develop different languages and civilizations?

Why is there death in the world?

Evolution can answer NONE of this.

You stay in the Bronze Age, I'll choose to advance.

BTW no one still has answered my question:

How did a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organize themselves into the first living cell?

[lucullus]

Helen Ellerbe is a secularist jew. I thought you didn't listen to jews? So you're a hypocrite.

Also, how is it that you are taking something from the past and judging it by today's standards?

It's a good thing the Church forbade witchcraft. It should always be illegal on the same par as devil worshiping.

Furthermore, Protestants also forbade witchcraft not just the Church. Take a look at the Salem Witch Trials of Colonial Massachusetts.

Where did you find that Helen Ellerbe is a secularist jew? Why does that matter? The facts are the facts and again, you choose to ignore them.

What is witchcraft? You believe people should be tortured in every different way, who practice it, as your religion did, but have no clue what it is. What is devil worshipping? You do not care that the church tortured these people, along with the church killing women and children as seen in the quotes above.