You are on the verge of declaring another victory, Sword. You are not here for discussion, that is clear. Like the medieval crusaders, you just want to be able to say you won something in the name of your god. What you won is immaterial. (heh)
Just one last point and then I will leave you alone.
We atheists know that if we do not talk about our views, they will not get discussed because there is no supernatural being in charge. It is up to us. But you believe in a being more powerful and more knowledgeable than you.
In your sig you quote something to the effect that for those who do believe, no proof is needed-- god has given believers all they need to believe without the need for proof. Even if science shows everything in the bible to be wrong, you will still believe. For those who do not believe, no proof is possible--that implies that god has already given up on unbelievers, because he knows what proof we need (cause he is god and knows all) and chooses not to present it (because if he wanted us to believe, we would).
If that is the case, why argue with us about the accuracy of the bible?
Why does it even matter to you what science says about grasshoppers, or anything else for that matter? You would accept the bible over science regardless, right?
Why try to talk us into your faith? Why not just leave it up to god?
Your premise is wrong, so it cant be the case. Even if I changed my premise to match yours (e.g, there is no god), I would still begin with an open mind, looking at the facts for and against. In this case, Biology was on side with the Bible, even ParkingPlaces could see that fact. How one ignores verses in context, shows how subjective thinking cannot accept the reality of God, even if it were true. Lets be honest about it, rather than hide it, thats all Im saying.
I dont need to try and talk anyone into our faith. If someone is really looking for answers objectively, they will find them - and i believe the Adventist mindset captures that model well, as do our adversaries, the Roman Catholic Church. Emotion and opinions do not help you find truth, only facts in light of history can do that. Everything else, is left to a degree of faith. We are not moved by our oponents claims because we have confidence in our ability to be objective of the facts and evidence placed in front of us.
You had to go there.
Objective religion? Gravitation is objective. Religion is about as subjective as you can get. That is why most people are never convinced of another religious group's beliefs through rational argument. Could a Hindu or Muslim convince you that Hinduism or Islam was correct? I doubt it.
If there was an objective
religion, there would not be a billion Hindus, a billion Muslims, two billion assorted Christians, and two billion "none of the above" all disagreeing with one another and all thinking that they have it right. Add in the fact that most people practice the religion of their parents, or ethnic group and/or geographical region, and religious "choice" looks a lot like a person's favorite food "choice" and native language "choice"-- pretty far from objective.
If there was an objective
religion, with logical arguments and facts that everyone would agree on regardless of cultural background, wouldn't that be the only one? There would not be any need for any explanations other than the objective one. We don't have a thousand competing equally compelling theories of gravitation, because basic physics is made up of observable, demonstrable, proveable facts. That is what objective means-- like basic arithmetic, everyone who looks at the same information will come to similar conclusions.
Not so with religion, or there would be only one, or at most a handful. Not hundreds or thousands, each emerging out of a specific historical context, with its own specific prophets and sacred works, and individualized to specific cultures. Somehow, that does not seem to be the way a supernatural being would work, unless he was trying to trick us!