This guy deserved a Nobel Prize. He truly made the world a better place.

On a related note, I wonder if anyone has released a "First Post Block Plus"?

Compress each audio file to a 5 MB MP3. That's 17.5 TB. Total size would be 750 terabytes.

So the data would be 6 LOC.

Don't ask me, ask God.

I know this isn't the answer you want, but it's the only answer. The Gospel can only be revealed to you by the Holy Spirit. The Bible is very clear on this. Let the Word of God be your guide and ask God directly what it means.

I know /. will try to ridicule me because I talk with God and because I believe God is inside of me, right now. Of course Christianity makes no sense when viewed though purely secular eyes. God gave us each free will so we can freely decide to worship him, or deny him. In the end, the judgment will be just.

First you say that I have no place in sharing my beliefs, and then you say that beliefs play a big part in the debate.

I was giving my beliefs as a background for my conclusions. I was not arguing that my base beliefs are correct. My argument was the conclusions that followed the statement of my beliefs.

Also, ThisIsAnonymous simply mistook my argument, and I was letting him know what actually I meant.

I did not say you were being a dick, nor did I feel that you were. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.

You thought that I was arguing that God created the heavens and the earth. That was not the case. Instead, I was explaining that the reason why I believe God created the heavens and the earth is because I believe the Bible and that's what the Bible says. You are correct that what I said would be a terrible argument as to why it is the case that God created the heavens and the earth.

The key difference here is that I was claiming only my belief and not the fact itself. Though I do see where you misinterpreted what my words.

I feel that evolution could somehow be disproved, but it will probably never be disproved for the reasons you list. However, that does not mean it should be thought as fact.

You make a good point that the base theory of evolution is very malleable and covers many possibilities. The problem I have here is that despite that fact, one version of evolution is taught with a lot of detail, all being claimed as fact. In one of my college courses earlier this year we went over the evolution of man. One of the students got in a big argument with the professor because they had learned the stages differently. In the end, the prof said that times change, and we think it's different now.

I'm not convinced that the entire earth was flooded, since that does not seem to be important. What I see as important in the story of Noah is the following: Man turned so evil that God regretted creating him. However, he did find favor in Noah. Therefore he wiped out the evil ones, essentially starting over with Noah. There are also a ton of other lessons to be learned about faith and whatnot.

What I'm trying to say is that these arguments do not shake my faith because my faith does not rely on the technical details of the Bible, but rather on the promise of God. You may accuse me of picking and choosing my verses, but as I explain in comment #27317735, you can not take every word in the Bible literally.

The more you know, the more you realize how much we don't know. I infer from your comment that you believe we have no need for a God. Science explains everything. But that's the problem: it doesn't.

The big bang theory, and many other theories, attempt to explain the creation of the universe. I don't mind those theories, and in fact quite a few seem possible, though woefully inadequate. What was there before the big bang? Nothing? Then what caused it? Some say there wasn't time either, so that question isn't valid. Then why did it happen? I've heard theories of 11 dimensional bodies colliding, rips in the multiverse, and the idea of the universe being a mere bubble of reality. The fact is that we just don't know.

So, the next time you look at that tree and wonder, "where did that come from?" and answer, "evolution", you should keep asking. "Where did that come from?" "the beginning of life" "and that?" "the big bang" "and that?" "we don't know". Religion is still relevant.

While you are correct that making a vague claim without backing it up is despicable at best, your argument is an appeal to ignorance and is therefore not valid either. Lets make a deal. Since we are both ill-equipped to dispute each other's claims, we should both research them so we don't stay ignorant. I believe that is the best we can hope for.

I agree with everything you say except for the idea that some theories, including evolution, are beyond doubt. You can claim something is true and give 1000 reasons why it is, but it only takes one counter-example to show that it is false.

I am a Mathematics major. My field is often regarded as the one known truth of the universe. That view is only held by those who do not know math as I know math. Things we are sure of are often disproved, and must be adjusted or thrown out completely. I guess the idea that I hold could be stated as "never stop doubting something unless you're willing to give your life for it." But even that has some problems with it.

I do agree that large religious organizations can easily be used as a method for control. For this reason I urge you to join a small non-denominational church or read the Bible on your own or with a small study group. You need not subject yourself to any kind of organization to believe in God.

When I learned Physics, the Professor outright told us that what we were being taught was wrong. When you think about how Einstein turned physics on its head, you begin to realize why he said that.

You are wrong in many of your assumptions. The debate about the validity of evolution is still hot, and new discoveries are changing our views of science every day. I am sorry I do not have the time to argue these points with you. I must leave this response as a mere assertion, and as such you should not accept it. However, please research your claims. I believe you will find a wealth of interesting information.

I am currently taking a critical thinking class in college and I know well of the "begging the question" fallacy. There is only one fault in your analysis. You assume that the statement you quoted is an argument, which is a controversial conclusion supported by premises. However, it is actually a mere description of what my beliefs are. This can be seen by the fact that you can not argue the opposite point - that I do not believe that "God created the heavens and the earth", because that is subjective.

You can not take every word in the Bible literally. It was not meant to be a literal factual scientific document. It was written to teach people the Word of God.

If you take every word literally, you will run into a great many problems. Not the least of which is Mark 4:31 which states "It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest seed you plant in the ground." Again, this was written to be understood by the common man.

I am not inconsistent in my beliefs. It is the one who does not understand the purpose of the Bible and takes every word literally who will find himself faced with inconsistencies.

The reason the Bible does not go into detail about the creation of the Earth is obvious once you consider the purpose of the Bible: How the Earth was created simply is not important. All that is important is that the Earth is God's creation. This the Bible says clearly, explicitly, and repetitively.

I am a Christian who believes the Bible. I therefore believe that "God created the heavens and the earth." However, I also believe that Evolution is possible because it fits most of our current scientific views and it seems to be compatible with my beliefs. This includes the idea that even humans are descended from common ancestry with all other life on Earth. After all, the Bible does tell us that God created Earth, but not how he created it.

Students should not be told that the theory of evolution is wrong. Nor should Students be told that it is right, either. The fact is that as a scientific community, we still do not know for sure. Also, every day we disprove things we thought we knew "for sure". This is the nature of Science. We have to teach what we think we know, and present it as such. Doing anything else would be dishonest.