User talk:35.141.213.2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

april 2024[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Gaismagorm. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Gaismagorm (talk) 16:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. So, you removed the truth (the only truth in this article) because you deemed it fake? 35.141.213.2 (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i am not attacking your belief, however you have failed to provide a source or gain consensus, both of which are required under wikipedias rules. secondly, the truth you speak of is already stated in the article, and you also removed others messages on the talk page which is also not allowed on wikipedia. below you accuse us of violating the first amendment, yet you fail to understand that the first amendment only applies to the government issuing punishment, yet private media organizations are allowed to restrict ones speech if it violates the organizations policy. Gaismagorm (talk) 17:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for correcting me and making me aware of this. Though, how was I being disruptive for sharing truth? 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not the place to share what you deem to be the truth. That's precisely what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 17:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware of this, though I thought I might do you a favor. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you failed to use correct grammar. "I" should always be capitalized. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes however I don't particulary worry about grammar when on talk pages, so long as the message is understood clearly Gaismagorm (talk) 17:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
on wikipedia, we tend to provide the msot well agreed upon piece of truth. and what is truth really? im sure if oyu asked an evolutionary scientist what the truth was they would say that evolution was the truth, and in general wikipedia finds scientists trustworthy (especially when regarding evolution which has had decades of study), therefore wikipedia accepts the common belief of the scientific community. also, you removed anothers message which is very much not allowed. Gaismagorm (talk) 17:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, I am very sorry. As for your question, truth is what is, well...true (what God says), which so happens to be God's word. Plus, evolution is founded upon guessing, whereas the Bible, Gods Word, is founded upon "truth". In fact, not only is it founded upon truth, but the Bible is also perfectly aligned with truth, (and history) and truth itself. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes, however in this case truth is something that changes person to person. not only that, but wikipedia is founded on principals of science and not religious doctrine, and what you are stating is religious doctrine. not only that, but if wikipedia were to just use the bible for truth, then there would be countless issues due to the different translations and versions of the bible. finally, evolution is not based on guessing, it is based off of analysis of evidence, as is almost all of science. Gaismagorm (talk) 17:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The different translations of scripture are like one thing in many different languages. It just helps different people read the same thing. And analysis is just guessing based off of "evidence". 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:45, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
in that case one could say that gravity is just guessing based off of evidence. I mean, whats to say the earth isn't just moving up making us seem like we are falling. but the thing is we have enough evidence to prove gravity's existence, and we have plenty of evidence for evolution. we've even seen it happen in modern times (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1081602X.2023.2192193) Gaismagorm (talk) 18:07, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for most agreed upon piece of truth, 68% of people claim Christianity. The Bible has been studied far longer than evolution, 7,000 years. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
while the bible has indeed been studied longer than evolution, it is also importnat to note that the bible is interpreted in countless ways. there are even some cases of contradiction in the bible (such as the fact that there are 2 genesis stores). besides, you listed the amount of christians, not the amount of people who believe in evolution, there are countless christians who believe in evolution, and the leaders of the largest denomination (catholicism) ihave stated that things such as evolution are indeed compatible with the christian way of life. Gaismagorm (talk) 17:43, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Two Genises stories?? Where is that found? And what other contradictions? And just because Catholicism believes it, Baptists don't. Plus, just because their leader does, not all of them do (like Abraham Lincoln), in addition, someone can't believe the Bible AND evolution. "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1) 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:53, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And because it is interpreted in different ways doesn't mean it's wrong. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello? 35.141.213.2 (talk) 18:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes however it is completely okay to interpret the bible symbolically and metaphorically. also heres my source for two genesis stories
genesis 1-> https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Genesis-Chapter-1/
genesis 2-> https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Genesis-Chapter-2/
in these two sections there are two seperate stories of how god created humans, with the first story stating that he created humans on the fifth day and the second stating that he created humans sometime after the seventh day Gaismagorm (talk) 18:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
also I have checked and the pew research centre states that around 65% of adults in the us believe in evolution
source -> https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2015/07/01/chapter-4-evolution-and-perceptions-of-scientific-consensus/ Gaismagorm (talk) 18:04, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It said He ended His work, meaning He was done making everything. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 18:07, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it's "God" not "god". 35.141.213.2 (talk) 18:08, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if we want to discuss capitalization, then might I ask why you capitalize "he" when pronouns are usually not capitalized? Gaismagorm (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And why did you capitalize the word "word" in the phrase "God's word" Gaismagorm (talk) 18:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since God is holy, we capitalize "H" in "He". Word is capitalized since it is another name for the Bible. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 18:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i implore you to check genesis 1:27 which takes place during the fifth day and genesis 2:7 which takes place sometime after the seventh day Gaismagorm (talk) 18:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a flashback, it shows how much God loves Humans. Everything else is simply spoken into existence, God took the time to form us with His hands. (You capitalize "g" because that's His name.) 35.141.213.2 (talk) 18:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
also another thing, the bible has only been around for an estimated 3,400 years (and that's only when discussing the story of genesis, the full bible in the christian sense has only been around for about 2,000 years) Gaismagorm (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
and the oldest piece of written biblical text is only about 2,700 years old Gaismagorm (talk) 18:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
anywhoo im probably gonna stop arguing because every point i need to make has been said. goodday. Gaismagorm (talk) 18:19, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Bible is like a history book. It might have been written after, but it is still true. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 18:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
read above message
have a great day Gaismagorm (talk) 18:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gooday. :) God Bless, farewell,etc. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 18:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you have one, too. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 18:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thank you Gaismagorm (talk) 18:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. ~~lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 16:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is my belief system any more disruptive than yours? What if I find evolution offensive? Will you take down the article? No, you will not. So why are you attacking my belief system? Also, I have the 1st Amendment on my side. I also have the freedom of religion. I LOUDLY PROCLAIM CHRISTIANITY!! 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:10, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(B.T.W., I find evolution disruptive :) 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You committed signature forgery by inserting your belief into Cain.209's messages. Religion was purely coincidental. ~~lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 17:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, but I am a new user. I apologize for forgery. 35.141.213.2 (talk) 17:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
The only rights you have on this private website are the ones the owners and admins give you. You are welcome to go outside or other public place and exercise your rights that apply in those fora. Here, you have to follow the rules that are set for here. We're an encyclopedia, not a chat-site. DMacks (talk) 17:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:35.141.213.2&oldid=1218268398"