Why take time to expose false doctrines such as evolutionism?

[BobRyan]

Did Bob get banned from origins?

Is that forum still active?

[BobRyan]

I am a creationist and always have been,

I want to congratulate CoAspen for the brave corrageous stand in favor of the "Six days you shall labor...for in SIX days the Lord MADE.." position of on the 7 day Creation week of Genesis 1:1 - 2:3... but first.

Is there anyone on this board for whom the statement above comes as "news"??

[olger]

Evolution stinketh exceedingly.

Ameneth

G

[Guest]

Isn't that what all Seventh Day Adventists believe?

[phkrause]

So what happen to the origins forum? I just noticed that I don't see it anymore.

pk

[Bravus]

See top of this page.

[phkrause]

Oh, thanks Bravus, but why can't I see it anymore?

pk

[Stan]

Bob..... am thinking you might enjoy yourself better elsewhere...

[Guest]

Are you asking Bob to leave?

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

I am a creationist and always have been,

I want to congratulate CoAspen for the brave corrageous stand in favor of the "Six days you shall labor...for in SIX days the Lord MADE.." position of on the 7 day Creation week of Genesis 1:1 - 2:3... but first.

Is there anyone on this board for whom the statement above comes as "news"??

Bob,

With all due respect, if I must believe and act as you do to be an Adventist, I am not. If I must believe and act as you do to be a Christian, I am not. If I must believe and act as you do to be a creationist, I am not.

But here is the news flash for you. Since thankfully you are not the one defining and determining what it means to be any of the above, I am affirmatively all three.

What is the length of a day in heaven? Don't answer that, just think about it silently.

Tom

[Dr. Shane]

Origins started out as a private, 'by invitation' forum, with the express purpose of trying the very difficult task of discussing Origins in a civil manner. it operated that way for a couple of years, but then for a variety of reasons Stan decided to open it up to everyone.

Origins started out as a private forum but since its beginning it was never civil until Bevin decided to stop coming here. Bevin was the cyber bully that would insult and intimidate anyone that dared believe in the literal creation week. He got so bad that he even insulted the esteemed Dr. Kennedy and then refused to apologize to her. The Origins forum was only made public after Bevin left and it became a somewhat friendly place.

Now we have some new members that have joined that are creationists. As rude and obnoxious as some of them are, they hardly hold a candle to the venom that Bevin use to spew there. I am all for a civilized discussion. Rules have been made for C/A that would help make such forums civilized but those rules are only selectively enforced. I think that is the biggest reason why the forum was abused in the past by Bevin and now by some new members. Even-handed enforcement of the rules is what is needed to maintain a civil forum.

Now that may be too much for one moderator to do - and a volunteer at that. It may require two moderators and for posts to be pre-approved before getting posted to the board. That may be too much work for what we are doing here.

[BobRyan]

Although the tone of posts has changed in the last day --

Here is the post that we started with on this subject --

http://clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthread...html#Post274458

Originally Posted By: olger

Errors like evolution need to be exposed and they are, thank God.

G

Amen and amen!

This particular topic and this section of the board is marked by a harmony and unity and affirmation appreciation of the inspired text (and a distinct lack of ad hominem sniping etc) that you might not find on every subject or every area of the board when it comes to this subject.

What a blessing!

in Christ,

Bob

Comments and contrasts welcomed.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: BobRyan

I want to congratulate CoAspen for the brave corrageous stand in favor of the "Six days you shall labor...for in SIX days the Lord MADE.." position of on the 7 day Creation week of Genesis 1:1 - 2:3... but first.

Is there anyone on this board for whom the statement above comes as "news"??

Bob,

With all due respect, if I must believe and act as you do to be an Adventist, I am not. If I must believe and act as you do to be a Christian, I am not.

[/quote']

The ad hominem nature of your post is noted.

However in my quote above I am simply asking if anyone else was aware that CoAspen believed in a literal 7 day creation week.

The question stands without my saying to CoAspen anything of the sort "if I must... as you do ... then I am not".

I believe the unbiased objective reader will notice that not-so-subtle "detail".

Hence -- if you knew CoAspen was a believer in a literal 7 day creation week you could have posted "I knew CoAspen was a believer in a 7 day creation week before that post".

Which was all that was asked -- as it turns out.

Originally Posted By: Tom

Since thankfully you are not the one defining and determining what it means to be any of the above, I am affirmatively all three.

As far as I know -- I have not said anything at all to you on this thread nor much to you even on this subject until this post. And even this post is not the "flame post" you seem to be offering and apparently seeking in response.

in Christ,

Bob

[Tom Wetmore]

Bob,

You really don't have to turn every post into a basis for argument.

A simple question for you - Based on my posts thus far on this subject are you including me among those that you consider to be evolutionists?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Tom

[BobRyan]

Tom -- as it turns out I have not looked into your position.

Richard has asked that I help him with some of his projects.

Bob

[there buster]

Bravus said:

Quote:

I find the tight distinction that is drawn between 'attacking the argument' and 'attacking the person' to often be much too artificial to be a useful guide.

Bravus said:

Quote:

I have not called you a 'liar', but I have sai 'you are lying'.

[Guest]

When you say someone is lying you are calling them a liar, for a person cannot lie without being a liar.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Bravus

Still lying, Bob. You were not banned for being a creationist, because the Origins forum is almost entirely creationists.

Now I will grant you that on most non-SDA boards - an ad hominem remark such as you just made above - is considered a TOS violation.

would you name them please?

[teresaq]

The not-so-subtle detail you want the reader to miss ...

So having no proof at all -- you simply try the glossover above.

Indeed - You seem to settle for empty factless claim after factless claim with the hope that the readers will "imagine" that at some point in the distant past you actually had a fact to support your accusations piled on top of accusation.

What curious minds want to know is -- why do you think that is working???

hmmm, tis in the mind of the beholder?

out of curiosity, is the logic that if the opponent is wrong this is ok? but if the other is right then it is not?

just curious....

oh, and dear sir, i am a die-hard creationist

but i hope and pray that more than that i am little by little learning to be like Jesus and treat people with the utmost respect.

[Stan]

Am not sure all realize that insulting an opinion runs close to the same as insulting a person.

A little tac and respect can go a long ways.

[there buster]

Quote:

When you say someone is lying you are calling them a liar, for a person cannot lie without being a liar.

Actually, that is mistaken. What we do is not identical to what we are. People who habitually lie might fairly be called liars. But many an otherwise honest person occasionally falls to temptation and intentionally prevaricates.

Similarly, a person may make a foolish or silly argument without being a fool or being silly. Not everyone who sings is a singer. Not everyone who preaches is a preacher.

Failure to make this distinction makes honest discussion very difficult. Applying the mistaken action=beign rule inconsistently and allows certain people to manipulate the agenda.

It is a false rule, but at least if it is applied consistently, people know how to conduct themselves. As it is, some are allowed to use invective and inflammatory language and false equivalence, while others are prohibited. It's a source of significant friction here.

[Woody]

Quote:

It is a false rule, but at least if it is applied consistently, people know how to conduct themselves. As it is, some are allowed to use invective and inflammatory language and false equivalence, while others are prohibited. It's a source of significant friction here

True.

A good point and observation.

Thanks there buster.

[Bravus]

{edited: thought better of it}

[Woody]

{edited: thought better of it}

Ahhh Bravus. I am sure that any thought of your's would be kosher. Spill the beans.

[Dr. Shane]

I can repeat a lie without being a liar. For example I may hear a news report of something that is a lie. I then repeat the lie because I believe it is true.