Kirk Cameron Will Disprove Evolution on His Show

[Redem]

Ok... I totally retract my earlier statement. That was pathetic.


I mean... all they had was a badly phrased argument from design. What a retard.  

[Theophrastus]

we has a painteeng hurrrrrr  

[Redem]

1: I has a painting
2: ??????
3: Therefore God, or you all burn in hell scream  

[ProjectOmicron88]

I think I've heard of this joker. I heard a "scientific" theory about God's existence a while ago that went something like this:

"Since sound, an energy, cannot exist without matter, sound and energy have a direct relation to matter. Therefore, it was God's voice that gave life to the creatures of the earth."

I'm paraphrasing it, but I remember in the original train of "logic", he skipped a couple steps. I think if a Christian needs to try to prove that God exists, he doesn't have enough faith. That's where religion differs from science: religion isn't about proof.  

[Lethkhar]

Did anyone see the debate with the Rational Response Squad? ******** hilarious. He was ripped apart!  

[Theophrastus]

Replied with a short version earlier in this thread.

Kirk and Ray were demolished.  

[Redem]

It was um.. embarassing >_>  

[SkeletonPhoenix]

I dislike the way the Rational Response Squad handled themselfs. But those Idiots(ca"moron") did get what was coming to them.  

[Super Ivan Drago]

Kirk and Ray lost the debate second they decided to break the premise they set up themselves -- Proving God without using the Bible. The premise was laughable and I didn't expect anything of substance, but I didn't expect the debate to be lost so early. I have even talked to Christians who said that Kirk and Ray were an embarrassment. That's really saying something.  

[Cirosan]

I just watched the shorted version, and honestly, that was positively pathetic.

I apologize. I attempt to be objective whenever possible, but there's really no middle ground to take when one side was completely and utterly illogical, and violated the rules they themselves set.

In addition, I'd also like to provide an alternate rebuttal to the painting piece of "evidence." I concede that a painting must be painted by a painter to be created. However, what about, say, a plant? That plant wasn't created. A seed embedded itself in the ground after another plant shed its seeds and it fluttered off, using its leaves as makeshift wings. Over time, through photosynthesis (among other things), it grew into a plant. No where in there did anyone take action that resulted in its creation. The plant became what it is through natural, automatic processes. Therefore, not everything requires anyone to take action for it to be created. Ipso facto, the universe does not prove nor disprove the existence of a creator (or in this case God).