How many dozens of Christians did creationism drive away this past hour?

Subduction Zone said:

No, but wouldn't you be concerned if your only choices for leaders were those that

That is why I like pointing out to many of them that there are Christian groups that accept the theory of evolution.

Again go to http://biologos.org/ for a refreshing Christian view on evolution.

Click to expand...

I've been there repeatedly. They do not view that God had nothing to do with life on earth do they?

Oncedeceived said:

Well that is fine, just summarize what evidence he has for this premise.

Click to expand...

Have you heard of the Theory of Mind?

Oncedeceived said:

I've been there repeatedly. They do not view that God had nothing to do with life on earth do they?

Click to expand...

I never implied that they do. They do accept that life evolved. They do accept that all life has a common ancestor. They simply mix that acceptance with a belief in God.

Subduction Zone said:

Here is your first major mistake. That there was no worldwide Flood anytime, much less in just man's lifetime,.....

Click to expand...

Gould, Stephen Jay, “The Return of Hopeful Monsters,” Natural History, vol. 86 (June/July 1977), pp. 22-30.p. 22 “The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change, and the principle of natural selection does not require it-selection can operate rapidly.“p. 24 “As a Darwinian, I wish to defend Goldschmidt’s postulate that macroevolution is not simply microevolution extrapolated and that major structural transitions can occur rapidly without a smooth series of intermediate stages.“p. 24 “All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt.“p. 28 “The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase: natural selection is the creative force of evolutionary change. No one denies that natural selection will play a negative role in eliminating the unfit. Darwinian theories require that it create the fit as well.”

Click to expand...

Douglas, Erwin, James W. Valentine, and David Jablonski, “The Origin of Animal Body Plans,” American Scientist, vol. 85 (March/April 1997), pp. 126-137.p. 126 “All of the basic architectures of animals were apparently established by the close of the Cambrian explosion; subsequent evolutionary changes, even those that allowed animals to move out of the sea onto land, involved only modifications of those basic body plans. About 37 distinct body architectures are recognized among present-day animals and from the basis of the taxonomic classification level of phyla.

Click to expand...

Gould, Stephen Jay, “A Short Way to Big Ends,” Natural History, vol. 95 (January 1986), pp. 18

“Studies that began in the early 1950s and continue at an accelerating pace today have revealed an extensive Precambrian fossil record, but the problem of the Cambrian explosion has not receded, since our more extensive labor has still failed to identify any creature that might serve as a plausible immediate ancestor for the Cambrian faunas.”

Click to expand...

And last but not least.... click on link below to see this evolutionist's article from where this quote had come from.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/science/new-approach-to-explaining-evolutions-big-bang.html?_r=0

It took a global flood to tap that capacity, Dr. Smith and Dr. Harper propose. They base their proposal on a study published last year by Shanan Peters of the University of Wisconsin and Robert Gaines of Pomona College. They offered evidence that the Cambrian Explosion was preceded by a rise in sea level that submerged vast swaths of land, eroding the drowned rocks.

Click to expand...

Now how is that not proving science has been groping in the dark with the evolution theory, now redefining it from gradual macroevolution to rapid macroevolution, and creditting a global flood as the cause for macroevolution?

Science is about what is observed and can be proven and so believers can enjoy this site below.

http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYoung/scientific_evidence_for_a_worldwide_flood.htm

Fossils don't form on lake bottoms today, nor are they found forming on the bottom of the sea. 15Instead, they normally only form when a plant or animal is buried soon after it dies. 16Therefore, the fossils themselves are evidence of a catastrophe such as a flood or volcanic eruption that took place in the past.

Click to expand...

Even ABC News had a story about the proof of a global flood.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/ev...t-flood-noahs-time-happened/story?id=17884533

"The questions is, was there a mother of all floods," Ballard said......

Four hundred feet below the surface, they unearthed an ancient shoreline, proof to Ballard that a catastrophic event did happen in the Black Sea. By carbon dating shells found along the shoreline, Ballard said he believes they have established a timeline for that catastrophic event, which he estimates happened around 5,000 BC. Some experts believe this was around the time when Noah's flood could have occurred.

Click to expand...

Now since only eight souls were saved aboard Noah's ark, then all the nations of the earth are related to Noah and they would contain some semblance of the flood legends.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=64

Although most historians who have studied this matter estimate that these legends number into the 200s, according to evolutionary geologist Robert Schoch, “Noah is but one tale in a worldwide collection of at least 500 flood myths, which are the most widespread of all ancient myths and therefore can be considered among the oldest” (2003, p. 249, emp. added). Schoch went on to observe:

Narratives of a massive inundation are found all over the world.... Stories of a great deluge are found on every inhabited continent and among a great many different language and culture groups (pp. 103,249).

Click to expand...

Would this be enough evidence to refute that there was no global flood?

Course, the debate is when it had occurred, but again, if it happened within the 50,000 year period, that would make the evolutionists' dating method seriously flawed.

Subduction Zone said:

No, but wouldn't you be concerned if your only choices for leaders were those that

That is why I like pointing out to many of them that there are Christian groups that accept the theory of evolution.

Again go to http://biologos.org/ for a refreshing Christian view on evolution.

Click to expand...

Which I will say again...when it suits your purposes you will run out the many if not most Christians accept evolution then when that isn't good for an argument, you pull out the big bad YEC boogieman.

Subduction Zone said:

I never implied that they do. They do accept that life evolved. They do accept that all life has a common ancestor. They simply mix that acceptance with a belief in God.

Click to expand...

Yet you still argue against their God, you still claim that they are wrong.

He's is another person trying to speak outside his mind. No matter what theory someone has of the mind the theory itself is the product of the mind. It's nothing but a dog chasing his own tail.
Basically the theory of the mind is idol worship . A man own creation becomes his god. Now this is what atheist is trying to accuse the believer not realize he saw off his own limb from the tree.

Oncedeceived said:

Do you feel freedom of religion should be eliminated? Do you feel that voting is not any longer fair and right?

Click to expand...

No, and no.

Do you feel that untestable, unevidenced, and unfalsifiable religious dogma should trump mainstream science in your government and education systems?

Oncedeceived said:

Recognizing someone is a bad thing?

Click to expand...

Nice dodge.

Oncedeceived said:

This is only your opinion and assertion.

Click to expand...

The burden is on you to show otherwise. He offered the more parsimonious explanation.

Smidlee said:

Don't worry since God can easily change that.

Click to expand...

The Chinese could easily change that, and they exist.

Davian said:

The Chinese could easily change that, and they exist.

Click to expand...

From what I'm hearing the church is growing in China.

Smidlee said:

He's is another person trying to speak outside his mind. No matter what theory someone has of the mind the theory itself is the product of the mind. It's nothing but a dog chasing his own tail.
Basically the theory of the mind is idol worship . A man own creation becomes his god. Now this is what atheist is trying to accuse the believer not realize he saw off his own limb from the tree.

Click to expand...

So you don't think the basic premise of being able to recognise that other people have a minds like our own is either true or has implications/ramifications?

Tellastory said:

And last but not least.... click on link below to see this evolutionist's article from where this quote had come from.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/science/new-approach-to-explaining-evolutions-big-bang.html?_r=0



Now how is that not proving science has been groping in the dark with the evolution theory, now redefining it from gradual macroevolution to rapid macroevolution, and creditting a global flood as the cause for macroevolution?

Click to expand...

No, it is not. There is nothing there about a global flood. You don't seem to understand your own sources.

Science is about what is observed and can be proven and so believers can enjoy this site below.

http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYoung/scientific_evidence_for_a_worldwide_flood.htm

Click to expand...

Sorry, but that is a nonsense site spouting only PRATT's.



Even ABC News had a story about the proof of a global flood.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/ev...t-flood-noahs-time-happened/story?id=17884533[/quote]

ABC News is not a scientific source. That is only an article where they interviewed an idiot. I know that you can't find any science that supports your views but this is getting ridicuous.

Now since only eight souls were saved aboard Noah's ark, then all the nations of the earth are related to Noah and they would contain some semblance of the flood legends.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=64

Click to expand...

Yes, but if that were the case we would also show the genetic remains of an incredibly strong population bottleneck. The fact that no such bottleneck exists debunks that story. And you should know that "apologetics" is aptly named. They are apologizing for the errors in the Bible. How ironic.

Would this be enough evidence to refute that there was no global flood?

Course, the debate is when it had occurred, but again, if it happened within the 50,000 year period, that would make the evolutionists' dating method seriously flawed.

Click to expand...

No, it wouldn't. Bring up your nonsense a point at a time and I will gladly refute them in depth. If you bring up garbage en masse I will simply point out your errors.

Meanwhile, here is a geologic structure that no flood advocate can explain:

Mr Strawberry said:

So you don't think the basic premise of being able to recognise that other people have a minds like our own is either true or has ramifications?

Click to expand...

My scientific views are founded on " God created heaven and earth and man's intelligence is a gift from God."
The foundation of science can not then be proven by science. Thus trying to prove God with science is circular reasoning since that's what my scientific view resting on.

Oncedeceived said:

Yet you still argue against their God, you still claim that they are wrong.

Click to expand...

No, I argue against creationists. They are hardly what I would call creationists. Here we are not really allowed to debate against the concept of God.

Smidlee said:

My scientific views are founded on " God created heaven and earth and man's intelligence is a gift from God."
The foundation of science can not then be proven by science.

Click to expand...

So basically you commented on something without knowing anything about it.

Oncedeceived said:

Which I will say again...when it suits your purposes you will run out the many if not most Christians accept evolution then when that isn't good for an argument, you pull out the big bad YEC boogieman.

Click to expand...

YEC's are the worst of creationists. Their teachings would harm the U.S. as a whole. They are attempting to harm school children so yes, I do not like YEC's.

Mr Strawberry said:

So basically you commented on something without knowing anything about it.

Click to expand...

You only know what you already know. No matter how much education you give an animal it won't be a scientist because it doesn't have that ability. Now birds knows everything about flight for example. Birds can see the "colors" of the wind.

Oncedeceived said:

Anything that I would demonstrate, for instance, Israel being back in its own country you will deny.

Click to expand...

I do not deny it. I have explained to you why it is ineffectual as a declaration of prophecy.

Oncedeceived said:

That is how it works. The appearance of design in fine tuning you will deny it is actual design

Click to expand...

I do not deny that it is actual design. The burden is on you to show that it is actual.

Oncedeceived said:

even though you have no reason other than your biases to believe it isn't actual.

Click to expand...

I observe the continuing inability for individuals such as yourself to substantiate this opinion you have of "design". I do not hold your presuppositions.

Oncedeceived said:

If we can recognize what design appears like,

Click to expand...

Yet you have no testable criteria for "design" other than looking at it.

Oncedeceived said:

then it would stand to reason that it could be just that...actual.

Click to expand...

Only according to your presuppositions.

Oncedeceived said:

Christians are not moved by your denial,

Click to expand...

Do you speak for all Christians? Even those that accept mainstream science?

I am not moved by your repeated misrepresentation of my position. Must you?

Oncedeceived said:

only those few who share your position are swayed by it.

Click to expand...

Is reality now something we vote on?

Oncedeceived said:

It is not through reason that you determine that this appearance is not actual,

Click to expand...

I am not claiming it is not actual. Do not misrepresent my position.

Oncedeceived said:

it is through your view that no God exists.

Click to expand...

That is not my position. Are you having memory issues?