i love how one side is using arguments and the other is treatening my life, dodging questions and talk about CIA and KGB propaganda 
If i was argumenting in your side i admit I'd have to get creative aswell
Notifications
Clear all
General Poker Discussion
195
Posts
38
Users
0
Reactions
18.4 K
Views
I suport the theory of the anthropologist Victor Truner.I truly thing that he was close to the truth.He speaks for "communitas"- thats a transcedental feeling of social togetherness that only religion(rituals0 can bring!
Communitas as a social form alternates with "normal" social structure, and is, according to Victor Turner's theories, not limited to the liminal phase in rites de passage. [...] [Many social] phenomena are difficult to place within van Gennep's rites de passage model of separation, liminality and reintegration, [but] may more naturally be considered a form of "anti-structure", alternating with normal social structure. Turner detached the phenomena liminality and communitas from the model for transitional rituals (Turner 1969). The two social models exist simultaneously in a society, and no normal society can function adequately without this dialectic with communitas (Turner 1967:129). The alternation between the two states follows successively and is enforced naturally."
Originally posted by ihufa
so w34zel... You believe the bible to be 100% true or most of it to be or what?And what about the Koran? And all the other religions on earth are wrong right?
That would be the general idea, yes. And yes, the whole bible. There are no actual contradictions when you examine it in depth.
Originally posted by ihufa
As for your question about proof of evolution you can google it and find massive amounts of evidende and see that 99%+ of the scientific world beliefes in this theory.
You should qualify the accuracy of this figure if you wish to use it. I'd imagine it's actually a lot less than 99%. There are respected scientists who are also theists. Darwin believed in god, as we can see from his book the origins of the species. Ironic, huh?
Originally posted by ihufa
On the Hawaian Islands is a butterfly called Heddi Lipta (not sure if spelled correct). There are two species of this butterfly that can only feed on bananas and this is pretty interesting as bananas didn't exist on the Hawaian Islands before about a thousand years ago when they were introduced by the polynesians. So how on earth did they survive until then? If evolution is a hoax then they couldn't have evolved into banana eating butterflies so just how did they survive until the bananas were introduced?
They ate something else? They decided they like bananas better? It is possible for a species to adapt without evolving into an entirely new species. Adaptation is a scientific fact.
I would look further into the matter but seeing as I just strongly suspect you are trolling me I might do something else instead 
Originally posted by ihufa
i love how one side is using arguments and the other is treatening my life, dodging questions and talk about CIA and KGB propaganda
If i was argumenting in your side i admit I'd have to get creative aswell
ihufa My friend I really like you! ![:]](https://www.pokerstrategy.com/_forum-runtime/wp-content/uploads/wpforo/emoticons/pokerstrategy-legacy/basics/pleased.gif ":]")
I love you and even if you are a ugly troll for me you are a magic unicorn.Let me ride on your back and fly to the moon and back toghter!!! 
The butterflies have mouths that can ONLY eat bananas, nothing else.
And Darwin believing in god just proofs you can believe in both evolution and god. You can't really accept the entire bible because for obvious reasons but you can believe there is a god. I can certainly see the irony in that 
And so let me get this straight. You believe that Noah took two of each animal and put them on a boat? Were there dinosaurs there aswell?
Originally posted by bohemiagrove
Originally posted by ihufa
i love how one side is using arguments and the other is treatening my life, dodging questions and talk about CIA and KGB propaganda
If i was argumenting in your side i admit I'd have to get creative aswellihufa My friend I really like you!
personal bashing again
Originally posted by ihufa
Originally posted by bohemiagrove
Originally posted by ihufa
i love how one side is using arguments and the other is treatening my life, dodging questions and talk about CIA and KGB propaganda
If i was argumenting in your side i admit I'd have to get creative aswellihufa My friend I really like you!
personal bashing again
Let me make a sincere apology plz.Sorry my danish is not even bad is terrible.But I will give it a try.
Jeg er virkelig ked af ihufa!
Originally posted by bohemiagrove
wikipedia on Hitchens
Oh. I can pull a wiki too
Wiki
she has also faced a diverse range of criticism. These include objections by various individuals and groups, including Christopher Hitchens, Michael Parenti, Aroup Chatterjee, Vishva Hindu Parishad, against the proselytizing focus of her work including a strong stance against contraception and abortion, a belief in the spiritual goodness of poverty and alleged baptisms of the dying. Some medical journals also criticised years ago the standard of medical care in her hospice
Baptism of dying people? Kinda sick.
Originally posted by ihufa
The butterflies have mouths that can ONLY eat bananas, nothing else.
Heh, how does that one work then?
Originally posted by ihufa
And Darwin believing in god just proofs you can believe in both evolution and god.
Yes, and many do. It just isn't what the bible teaches.
Originally posted by ihufa
And so let me get this straight. You believe that Noah took two of each animal and put them on a boat? Were there dinosaurs there aswell?
Yes, I believe this account. There is in actual fact evidence of a global deluge, some of which may be interpreted as proof of ice-ages. For example, orthodox science teaches that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But apparent evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action.
Further evidence for the Flood appears to exist in the fossil record. At one time, according to the record, great saber-toothed tigers stalked their prey in Europe, horses larger than any now living roamed North America, and mammoths foraged in Siberia. All around the world, species of mammals suddenly became extinct while at the same time a sudden change of climate occurred. Tens of thousands of mammoths were killed and "quick-frozen" in Siberia. Some still even with food in their mouths (unlikely to be the work of a glacier). Alfred Wallace, a contemporary of Charles Darwin, considered that such a widespread destruction must have been caused by some exceptional world-wide event. Why not a global deluge?
It is also reasonable to suggest that pre-flood the Earth enjoyed a more temperate climate. This would certainly be the case if as described in the bible there were "waters above the expanse", effectively dispersing the sun's heat.
It is also interesting to note that the flood is one of the most widespread traditions in human culture. Could it be that this global flood was not a myth but reality?
As for the dinosaurs, science shows that they were around long before mankind. According to bible chronology man has only been around for 6k years, presumably the dinosaurs long gone.
How could the dinosaurs have been on the earth before man, when we were created within the same week 6000 years ago?
And even if every single glacier melted there wouldn't be enough water to cover the entire face of the earth.
And please tell me how the butterflies survived so far
Originally posted by w34z3l
Originally posted by ihufa
The butterflies have mouths that can ONLY eat bananas, nothing else.Heh, how does that one work then?
Originally posted by ihufa
And Darwin believing in god just proofs you can believe in both evolution and god.Yes, and many do. It just isn't what the bible teaches.
Originally posted by ihufa
And so let me get this straight. You believe that Noah took two of each animal and put them on a boat? Were there dinosaurs there aswell?Yes, I believe this account. There is in actual fact evidence of a global deluge, some of which may be interpreted as proof of ice-ages. For example, orthodox science teaches that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But apparent evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action.
That would have been one baller boat
Originally posted by ihufa
How could the dinosaurs have been on the earth before man, when we were created within the same week 6000 years ago?
It is not a literal week as later scriptures testify to. I will quote the exact scripture if you are interested.
The point is, each of these creative days may have been billions of years long. Plenty of time for the dinosaurs to come and go before humans.
Originally posted by ihufa
And even if every single glacier melted there wouldn't be enough water to cover the entire face of the earth.
From New Encyclopedia Britannica
"The average depth of all the seas has been estimated at 3,790 metres (12,340 feet), a figure considerably larger than that of the average elevation of the land above the sea level, which is 840 metres (2,760 feet). If the average depth is multiplied by its respective sufrace area, the volume of the World Ocean is 11 times the volume of the land above sea level".
Sooo, if everything were levelled out - if the mountains were flattened and the deep sea basins filled in - the sea would cover the whole earth to a depth of thousands of metres.
It is true that for the flood to have happened, the pre-flood sea basins would have to have been shallower, and the mountains lower than they are now. Science confirms that this is possible however; plate movements can cause this very effect on the earth's surface.
Originally posted by ihufa
And please tell me how the butterflies survived so far
Sure, when you answer my question about the butterflies mouths.
this proves that evolution is a fact look the troll evolution ,of chiren80 from a on-line troll to a live poker tornament troll!
Big transition that makes the bilble a lie and gives the darwinist lil hope...So called troll evolution.
yes, if you even out the lanscape and put all the water on top then it will only take a matter of litres to cover the entire surface, this is however not the case.
And so when the bible said a week it didn't mean a week? so things aren't meant to be taken litterally? We can just interpret it so it means what we need it to mean?
About the butterflies mouths im no biologist and i won't pretend to be one.
Originally posted by ihufa
yes, if you even out the lanscape and put all the water on top then it will only take a matter of litres to cover the entire surface, this is however not the case.
The landscape doesn't need to be totally even, just more even than it is now. This is perfectly plausible given the movement of tectonic plates. The point is, it is scientifically possible.
Originally posted by ihufa
And so when the bible said a week it didn't mean a week? so things aren't meant to be taken litterally? We can just interpret it so it means what we need it to mean?
Literal things should be interpreted literally, figurative things should be interpreted figuratively. (Bear with me). It isn't a case of interpreting things however we like. The 7 days are figurative days, or periods of time. How do we know? Hebrews 4:3-6 makes it clear that we are still in the seventh day. A creative day is therefore evidently much longer than a literal 24 hour period.
Reading certain scriptures in isolation may sometimes result in a misunderstanding. Analysing them in relation to the rest of the bible should make it clear whether something is to be interpreted literally or figuratively.
I don't know why I'm arguing against a theory that is impossible to ever disprove
I guess you're right and i was wrong
Lol, I just assumed you were trolling me anyway.
But I quite enjoy writing all this stuff so I don't mind.
The evolution theory is not "just a theory", it is a model that describes a series of established facts. Theory can have different meanings, in everyday talk we usually use the word theory for speculations or hypotheses. However, "theory" doesn't have the same meaning in science. Just like evolution is just a theory, gravity is also just a theory. The earth orbiting around the sun is also a theory.
My point is that scientific theories are not just thoughts and speculations, They are supported by evidence and can be used to make predictions about things that has not yet been observed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact#Theory