• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Another Example of Blatant Dishonesty from a Creationist...

Thana

Lady
next you will whine that it is color not colour and honor not honour and theater not theatre.

All the while whining about not wanting to play semantics....:shrug:

Semantics isn't spelling.

You can spell color or colour and both would be correct, But there is no lying and lieing. It's just lying. Anyway, Don't take it so hard, It's just constructive criticism. :shrug:
 

Thana

Lady
for you perhaps.

Try not to be so obvious when ignoring links that show you are in error.

FYI
I am done with this off topic whine fest.
Perhaps another time in another thread?

I'm not whining, I'm just trying to help you. I'd want someone to tell me if I was spelling something wrong. But whatever :shrug:
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Anyways, I'm a creationist, and usually I'm honest.

Basically, just another ridiculous 'creationists are ba-a-a-a-a-a-a-d' thread.
 

McBell

Unbound
Anyways, I'm a creationist, and usually I'm honest.

Basically, just another ridiculous 'creationists are ba-a-a-a-a-a-a-d' thread.

interesting how you would claim to be honest and then claim that proof positive of the blatant dishonesty of some creationists is "ridiculous".
 

John Martin

Active Member
The conflict between creationism and evolution is not necessary. Both are true.
The first thing is:what do we mean by creating? We do not know what creating means. We do not know how God acts. If we know that then we are higher than God and God ceases to be God and we become God. We can only say that God's action is not like a human action. We do not create things we make things, we invent things. Only God creates.
There are two levels that belong to the process of evolution. Evolution means complex beings coming from the simple beings: one is material and the other is psychological.
Material evolution begins with the bag bang and it takes billions of years to arrive to the physical reality we have to day. The second level is the psychological evolution to find the meaning of our life in this world. All religions, all scriptures, all philosophies and belief systems belong to this level. They also evolve from the simple beliefs to the complex beliefs.
These two levels of evolution are still part of the creative work of God. They manifest the aspirations of the human consciousness to discover its true destiny or source.
There is another level in us that does not belong to the process of evolution. It is the reflection of the divine within us. Biblical tradition calls it the image and likeness of God. Symbolically God, after making human beings, breathed his breath into the nostrils of human being. It means there is something in us which does not belong either to the process of material evolution and psychological evolution. It belongs to the timeless reality. It was there before the big bang began and the search for meaning of life began. All great religions affirm this truth.
The creation stories we find in the Bible do not refer to the process of material evolution. These stories tell us who we are why we are here. The story of the six days of creation is not scientifically true. it is true theologically. The people who wrote these stories were not physicists or scientists but theologians and mystics. There were not aware of the evolution of the matter. It was reserved to our generations to know that.
Evolutionary theory seems to say that our consciousness is the projection of the matter. It is the product of evolution. But the mystics tell us that our consciousness is the reflection is the eternal in us. Like the Sun reflecting in a mirror.
We have four levels in us:
1. Material evolution: It began with the big bang which produced our physical bodies. Modern science explains this process beautifully. Material evolution might say that only matter exists and God does not exist.
2. Psychological evolution: It seeks the meaning of life. It produced many sacred scriptures ,religions and philosophies and still continues to produce new philosophies and religions. The creation stories in this level try communicate the meaning and purpose of our life in this world and our life after this earthly life. It may not know the scientific view of creation. It presents God as the creator and creation as the creature of God. It tries to tell what is the place and the purpose of human beings in this world. Their relationship with the creator and with the fellow human beings.
3. The third level is the manifestation of eternity. It is like the ray of the Sun. It comes from the Sun and dependent on the Sun. It manifests eternity and does not go through the process of time and evolution. It is like the Moon which receives the light from the Sun and its reflects the divine light. It says 'I am in God and God is in me'. I am the manifestation of God. My origin is not in time and space but I come from eternity. Jesus Christ said, 'I am in the Father and the Father in me'.
4. The fourth fourth level is the divine level, the infinite. It is like the Sun. It is like Higgs Boson, that gives mass to the lower three levels. The lower three levels have no independent existence. In this level a person says, God and I are one. Jesus Christ said, 'the Father and I are one'.

The Evolutionists focus too much on the first level and deny the other three levels and think that the so called higher levels are the projections of the mere brain. they are illusions.
The creationists focus on the second level and deny the conclusions of the first level, and some might deny the third level also.
These both live in an endless conflict.
We need to go beyond the first level and the second level and discover the third and the fourth level which gives the wisdom to integrate the the first level and the second level without denying their truth. All the great mystics and sages like the Upanishad sages, Jesus Christ, the Buddha, the Prophet Mohammed and all the others have done that.
The conflict between the evolutionists and the creationists is unnecessary and unwanted.
The Evolutionist view without the creationist view reduces human beings into mere animals, or thinking animals whose purpose is just eat, drink,involve in sex, propagate and die without belief in life after.
The creationist view or religions, without scientific view, can be blind and superstitious. It can also confine people to the second level only, not opening the door to the third level and the fourth level.
Religions that are rooted in the mystical wisdom and oneness with God open the door to the third level and the fourth level and integrate the lower two levels. The way we can resolve the conflict between creationism and evolutionism is to discover the eternal spark, the image and likeness of God, with in us. Repentance is the process which Jesus Christ proposed to this transition. He said, 'the kingdom of God is at hand, repent. The eternity is within us, discover it.
 
Last edited:

Parsimony

Well-Known Member
I don't automatically assume that any given creationist is dishonest (in the sense that they tell others things that they know are lies). They really do believe in it. Been there, done that.
 

kashmir

Well-Known Member
I have to agree that the average creationist has no more of an idea of the implications of his creationist belief than he understands its nemesis, evolution, and acts out of ignorance rather than dishonesty, The kind of dishonesty, as you point out, practiced by the promoters of creationism. Of course there's a lot to be said for such dishonesty, all of it measured in $$$$


From my very first post on RF.
Better Business Bureau Report for Answers in Genesis of Kentucky Inc.(2008)

Governance
Chief Executive : Mr. Ken Ham, President & CEO
Compensation: $192,690
Financial Source of Funds

Contributions________________$9,610,789
GP on sale of goods____________6,038,902
Museum Admission_____________5,218,886
Museum Membership_____________855,723
Seminars_______________________517,427
Other__________________________394,116
In-Kind Donations_________________11,769
Interest and Dividend Income________2,248
_______________________________________
Total Income_____________$22,649,860


As I said in my first post, so what?
dawkins told many lies in his god delusion book and is why he will not debate the book with others who want to debate things he lied about.
Dawkins is making a fortune going around telling everyone that God is not real, can he even prove that to be true?
Nope.

Another atheist (forget his name) just came out with a book where he "proved" Jesus was made up, and others have completely ripped the book apart where he straight out lied about things the Romans did back then (claimed crucifixion was not common)
He twisted what historical figures back then said about Jesus, he left out very important data, the most important data that historians use that gives huge amounts of weight to Jesus's existence and crucifixion.

The whole book was written from a complete bias stance, which is why he left out all the important stuff we know for sure.

So atheists can do it but not religious people?

Hell, even scientists have been caught faking data to keep funding coming in and such.
Who cares?
8 billion people on the planet, and frankly, I haven't met a person yet that i could put my trust in fully.

I wonder just how many books are out there that tell you what is good for your heath, with the sole purpose to sell products that are not worth their weight as being a paperweight.


Ken Ham is worth 22 million?
Good for him, where is the numbers on what he gives back to the people? :sarcastic

BTW,
There are a lot richer people than him, that are feeding us unhealthy products and that worries me much more than his income does.
Here is one, Chevy is being sued for billions over a 12 dollar ignition switch that has killed a ton of people, and they knew about it for years.
That is the stuff I feel is important in the world, not some religious YEC, who prob gives back more to the people than every single person on this board does, combined.
I assume there is no millionaires on here that run churches, shelters, soup kitchens etc?​
 
Last edited:

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
As I said in my first post, so what?
dawkins told many lies in his god delusion book and is why he will not debate the book with others who want to debate things he lied about.
Dawkins is making a fortune going around telling everyone that God is not real, can he even prove that to be true?
Nope.

Another atheist (forget his name) just came out with a book where he "proved" Jesus was made up, and others have completely ripped the book apart where he straight out lied about things the Romans did back then (claimed crucifixion was not common)
He twisted what historical figures back then said about Jesus, he left out very important data, the most important data that historians use that gives huge amounts of weight to Jesus's existence and crucifixion.

The whole book was written from a complete bias stance, which is why he left out all the important stuff we know for sure.

So atheists can do it but not religious people?

Hell, even scientists have been caught faking data to keep funding coming in and such.
Who cares?
8 billion people on the planet, and frankly, I haven't met a person yet that i could put my trust in fully.

I wonder just how many books are out there that tell you what is good for your heath, with the sole purpose to sell products that are not worth their weight as being a paperweight.


Ken Ham is worth 22 million?
Good for him, where is the numbers on what he gives back to the people? :sarcastic

BTW,
There are a lot richer people than him, that are feeding us unhealthy products and that worries me much more than his income does.
Here is one, Chevy is being sued for billions over a 12 dollar ignition switch that has killed a ton of people, and they knew about it for years.
That is the stuff I feel is important in the world, not some religious YEC, who prob gives back more to the people than every single person on this board does, combined.
I assume there is no millionaires on here that run churches, shelters, soup kitchens etc?

Dawkins did not claim to have proven Jesus did not exist, you are being dishonest.

Can you identify one example of a lie in his book that you did not just invent?
 

Thana

Lady
Dawkins did not claim to have proven Jesus did not exist, you are being dishonest.

Can you identify one example of a lie in his book that you did not just invent?


Well... He did claim that it is possible to mount a serious historical case that Jesus never existed at all. Then he cites a professor who makes that claim, But it turns out that professor wasn't even a historian so go figure.

To me, That's pretty sneaky.

So he didn't exactly lie outright, But what he said was dishonest imo.
 

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
Well... He did claim that it is possible to mount a serious historical case that Jesus never existed at all. Then he cites a professor who makes that claim, But it turns out that professor wasn't even a historian so go figure.

To me, That's pretty sneaky.

So he didn't exactly lie outright, But what he said was dishonest imo.

I don't see your point - that is a very different claim than the one kashmir attributed to him, and so kashmir's accusation was false.

As to the professor - so what if he wasn't a historian? Lots of academics have interests and expertise across different fields. How was that dishones?
 
Last edited:

Thana

Lady
I don't see your point - that is a very different claim than the one kashmir attributed to him, and so kashmir's accusation was false.

As to the professor - so what if he wasn't a historian? Lots of academics have interests and expertise across different fields.

Because he acts as though he has a valid point, Which he doesn't, And he mentions an irrelevant professor for no other reason than to make it seem like he has a case.

Being a liar and being dishonest is not that different.
 

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
Because he acts as though he has a valid point, Which he doesn't, And he mentions an irrelevant professor for no other reason than to make it seem like he has a case.

Being a liar and being dishonest is not that different.


He does have a valid point, how is that dishonest?
 

kashmir

Well-Known Member
Well... He did claim that it is possible to mount a serious historical case that Jesus never existed at all. Then he cites a professor who makes that claim, But it turns out that professor wasn't even a historian so go figure.

To me, That's pretty sneaky.

So he didn't exactly lie outright, But what he said was dishonest imo.

Yes, in the god delusion book, he made several dishonest claims, mainly this one that lennox called him out on and dawkins reply was I dont really care actually.

I googled it, I guess there is a whole bunch of lies he tells that people call him out on.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=richard+dawkins+lies

found this too, someone took the time to completely pick apart the book itself
skimmed a few, found out that the court cases, where not what dawkins said they were in his book.
some of the stuff is pretty much opinionated material, but some is dawkins completely taking stuff out of context to have an argument.

Debunking Dawkins: The God Delusion Chapter 1: A deeply religious non believer

BTW, I also searched, and there is not one debate he has with anyone about the book itself, I have read that he straight out will not debate the book, simply because it can be picked apart and he will look completely stupid, if you will.
The part of Lennox calling him out on what he did say in the book about historians and then recanted, then said I dont care, is pretty pathetic of such an honest man, in my opinion, it's like he is saying "I will lie all I want to, so what?"
Gotta love the part where under his breath he says "yah one or two think he did exist...opps I mean most historians believe Jesus did exist" then in a lower voice "one or two dont though"
As if he hated to even admit the truth but had to and so used to lying.
Its obvious he knew he was lying, yet some atheists still claim it was just that he didn't know what historians say.
:facepalm:

starts at 8:37

[youtube]lbLRE_SIMMU[/youtube]

this one is funny
[youtube]oyjuXji5SZ4[/youtube]
 
Last edited:

Thana

Lady
He does have a valid point, how is that dishonest?

He said it is possible to mount a serious historical case that Jesus never lived.

It is also possible to mount a serious historical case that fairies are real, Since they're deeply ingrained in celtic history.

Dishonest.
 

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
He said it is possible to mount a serious historical case that Jesus never lived.

It is also possible to mount a serious historical case that fairies are real, Since they're deeply ingrained in celtic history.

Dishonest.

You admit it is possible - so how is that dishonest?

You could make a historical case for mythicism, it may not be terribly persuasive - but it could be done.
 

Thana

Lady
You admit it is possible - so how is that dishonest?

You could make a historical case for mythicism, it may not be terribly persuasive - but it could be done.

My point was it was a silly thing to say that has very little basis and was obviously there to manipulate people into thinking he was saying something relevant and extremely plausible. Most historians agree that fairies never existed, Just as most historians agree Jesus did exist.

He was being dishonest. Especially when he added that absolutely irrelevant professor.
 

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
My point was it was a silly thing to say that has very little basis and was obviously there to manipulate people into thinking he was saying something relevant and extremely plausible. Most historians agree that fairies never existed, Just as most historians agree Jesus did exist.

He was being dishonest. Especially when he added that absolutely irrelevant professor.


How is it dishonest? You could make such a case, and the case for the historicity of Jesus is no edifice.
 

kashmir

Well-Known Member
He said it is possible to mount a serious historical case that Jesus never lived.

It is also possible to mount a serious historical case that fairies are real, Since they're deeply ingrained in celtic history.

Dishonest.

Wait, I thought it was impossible to prove the negative?
Plus, if one could "mount a serious historical case that Jesus never lived."
Why did he not do that then? :facepalm:

All he did in the book was lie about what historians said and took others out of context, is that what he means by mounting a serious case? :sarcastic

And this is why he will not debate the book with anyone.

Seriously though, how could a man with the degrees he has say "I can mount a serious case against the existence of Jesus"
Yet, doing so would deem someone the noble peace prize, that is one of the most discussed and debated topics today.
"I can prove he didnt exist" but why dont he then?"

I cant stop hearing him say "I dont really care actually" :facepalm:
that second vid was funny.
Might make that my ring tone "i dont really care actually" "i dont really care actually" "i dont really care actually"
That is too funny, a man with his degrees reduced to saying that.
Imagine Obama saying that when asked about the national budget...."i dont really care actually"
 
Last edited:

Thana

Lady
How is it dishonest? You could make such a case, and the case for the historicity of Jesus is no edifice.

You've asked three times why it was dishonest and I've answered you three times.

It was not presented in an intellectually honest manner.

It was just there to manipulate.
 
Top