> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:29:16 -0500, in alt.talk.creationism
> "adman" wrote in
> bignews7.bellsouth.net>:

>> Free Lunch wrote:

> ...

>>> You know I did not lie. You have no evidence, but refuse to be
>>> honest here.

>>
>> Sure you lie. Wanna know the qualifier in your statement for that
>> assertion? You said " ignorant of history and science ". The two do
>> not belong in the same sentence.
>>
>> History is subjective and based upon the author's, as well as the
>> readers, interputation of the events.

>
> When a book makes a claim that is objectively false, it is wrong.
> Subjectivity comes in the understanding of the impact of something
> that happened. You don't get to claim that it doesn't matter that the
> story is objectively false.
>

>> Or are you saying science is merely subjective evidence. Now THAT
>> would be closer to truth in some cases since someone else can come
>> along with a revision making the first idea subjective.

>
> You are hopelessly dishonest, not only to us, but to yourself. It is
> sad that you reject objective facts so you can tell us lies.
>

>> But I will admit some hast on my part, because there is evidence that
>> contradicts the stories in the Bible and very little
>> that confirms any of the stories, scientifically. However, when you
>> compare ancient texts and draw some parallels you get some
>> consistency and interpolation. Which = truth is some cases and also
>> = truth in courts of law.

>
> You really have no idea what you are talking about, so you really need
> to stop worshipping your ignorance.
>

>> Bottom line is science does it's level best to explain things and
>> help mankind. BUT that is ALL it can do. Religion helps keep civil
>> order, even morality to a point. The two need to learn to co-exist.

>
> Religion is a tool of abuse.
>

>> it is really that simple

>
> Stop repeating that, you have been wrong every single time you
> finished a post with that pompous piece of nonsense. It isn't that
> simple and you don't understand it.