East Montana in West Texas. Geography is a funny thing sometimes.

Always in His Presence said:

A successful debate is an intelligent pro and con exchange using facts and well thought out opinions. The moment we liken a political person to Hitler, or a genocidal maniac - mutual exchange of infomration ends. It not only is non productive, but counter productive and IMHO show an extreme weakness and immaturity on the side that does it.

***Raises hand because I have been guilty of it.***

Click to expand...

I couldn't have said it better; I admit I'm also at fault.

It costs me $20 for a Mass to be said for my parents. I don't mind paying because it helps the church.

Wally Gator

Vytor: The Starfire Champion

Hvizsgyak said:

I beg to differ. I am finding more scientific people each day questioning evolution or Darwinism.

Over 1,000 Scientists Openly Dissent From Evolution Theory

Over 1,000 doctoral scientists from around the world have signed a "Dissent" statement expressing skepticism about Darwin's evolution theory. by Alex Newman

thenewamerican.com

Click to expand...

FYI that's not an anti-evolution statement. All it says is they are skeptical that all of life's history can be attributed to mutation and selection, which I promise you every evolutionary biologist agrees with.

Hvizsgyak said:

I'm sorry River Jordan, I lost my train of thought. Non-living material coming together (by itself) to create a simple form of life. I think that's where I was going with my thoughts.

Click to expand...

You need to show where the scientists who do origins research have said "you have to believe us" as you claimed.

Your claim is a little strange since usually creationists complain when scientists use words like "possibly" and "most likely". That's why it would help a lot if you could post a specific example of what you're referring to.

Hvizsgyak said:

So based upon the masterclass article you gave me it should be the Hypothesis of Evolution not the Theory of Evolution.

Click to expand...

No, you're still not getting it. You see, Darwin made a lot of predictions, based on his theory. And a huge number of them have since been confirmed to be true.

A few for example:
There would have to be transitional forms between birds and other dinosaurs.
There would be transitionals between reptiles and mammals.
Some mechanism to allow the persistence of useful new traits must exist. (in Darwin's time, ideas of inheritance ruled out such persistence)
A well-fitted population in a constant environment would evolve very little.
A change in environment would lead to evolution of a population in that environment.

There are many more. How many would you like to see? As you learned, an hypothesis becomes a theory after many of its predictions are confirmed by evidence.

Hvizsgyak said:

Because with the little information science has from our past (remember only 50 pieces of a 100,000 piece puzzle), they are just making educated guesses (yes, they may have some facts but nearly enough to form a Theory ).

Click to expand...

Well, let's ask a knowledgeable YE creationist:
Evidences for Darwin’s second expectation — of stratomorphic intermediate species — include such species as Baragwanathia27 (between
rhyniophytes and lycopods), Pikaia28 (between echinoderms and chordates), Purgatorius29 (between the tree shrews and the primates), and Proconsul30 (between the non-hominoid primates and the hominoids). Darwin’s third expectation — of higher-taxon stratomorphic intermediates — has been confirmed by such examples as the mammal-like reptile groups31 between the reptiles and the mammals, and the phenacodontids32 between the horses and their presumed ancestors. Darwin’s fourth expectation — of stratomorphic series — has been confirmed by such examples as the early bird series,33 the tetrapod series,34,35 the whale series,36 the various mammal series of the Cenozoic37 (for example, the horse series, the camel series, the elephant series, the pig series, the titanothere series, etc.), the Cantius and Plesiadapus primate series,38 and the hominid series.39 Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact.
Dr. Kurt Wise, Toward a Creationist Understanding of Transitional Forms

Warden_of_the_Storm said:

So, asking this as a genuine question and not an attempt at a 'gotcha' type question, how does the math for panspermia look then? And I'm not talking about the 'directed' panspermia that we see referenced in the article (which sounds a lot more along the lines of pseudoscience and outright science-fiction than anything actually scientific), but just general panspermia. Earth does show a vast array of impacts extraterrestrial asteroids and meteorites.

I also feel that looking at anything through a mathematical lense of chance will always end up looking bad, since if you number crunch anything hard enough, you can virtually say that anything is, to use the article's own words, 'unimaginably difficult'.

Click to expand...

I'll be watching this thread. It sounds like possibly another hole in the "Hypothesis of Evolution"

Clare73 said:

And there we have it. . .

Click to expand...

Yes, there we have the first amendment.

For now, at least.

Clare73 said:

Of those with saving faith, who "worries" about
the Trinity, or
justification, or
imputation, or
passive and active obedience of Christ, etc.?

Click to expand...

If the Trinity is the foundation of your faith and you understand it, I would say nothing against it. However, believing that the Messiah died for our sins and rose from the dead is sufficient for some. Justification, imputation, and passive and active obedience of Christ, etc. is not affected for others. Belief that Christ is the Messiah makes Jesus the Son of God and incorporates the Holy Spirit in His being. There is one God, and how the Holy Spirit, Christ, and The Father are related and form that unity is beyond the understanding of many people, but it doesn’t affect grace or salvation. If somebody says that they believe in the Trinity and not understand it, does it affect their salvation?

Always in His Presence said:

I bought one! Just to aggravate the low information voters in my area who actually think he is serious about running again.

Click to expand...

Y’all really are made for each other.

com7fy8 said:

I do not think a wife submitting to her man is meant . . . by God . . . to be dictatorial. For a leader we have >

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock." (1 Peter 5:3)

So, in case He does mean for the man to "rule", He does not mean dictating. It says it needs to be like how Jesus loves and rules the church. So . . . how does Jesus rule us? Not like a dictator; but He proves Himself, has taken to lead with His own example, and gives us "rest for your souls" (Matthew 11:28-29) while we are submitting to Him.

And Jesus does better with us, than how we . . . men or women . . . would do. So, we clearly do not want what the man is capable of dictating.

And this "better" way can be how you choose to do things in your marriage . . . better than anyone legalistic might try to dictate for us to do.

Click to expand...

Hello Bill.
i think your sayings are right, but is this clearly written in the Scriptures or said by God ? The doubt induces me into being cautious

River Jordan said:

So we're back to where we were a while ago when I asked you to post an example of scientists saying "you must believe us" and you didn't reply.

Can you give an example this time?

Click to expand...

I'm sorry River Jordan, I lost my train of thought. Non-living material coming together (by itself) to create a simple form of life. I think that's where I was going with my thoughts.

Say it aint so said:

I don't think he is that much of the authoritarian (or I would like to think so)

Click to expand...

I think he wants to be.

Say it aint so said:

but let's say he does run.
Never mind his base.
How would the GOP in the house and senate respond?
Would it be a cold "no" or the pattern of more capitulation?

Click to expand...

I’m not sure it’s up to them.

I mean, legally and politically speaking it is but I have no reason to doubt Trump will make a run at a third term. How well that will play out for him, I’m not sure but the intention is there and it’s up to his team of lawyers to figure out what legal loophole is going to best achieve that outcome. We’ve seen this already with his attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

Why the GOP (and the rest of) Congress leave me with no confidence is that they haven’t stood up to one thing he’s done. They’ve pretty much all fallen in line at this point. Their political futures depend on telling the maga base what they want to hear and until there’s a break in that toxic culture, I have no reason to not expect the worst.

Given the history of Presidential Nobel prizes for peace.
Where of all people George (war of choice) Bush was nominated.
Specially since most actions of peace were just temporary cease fires.
Specially now with the politicization of the nomination used as a tool for favor.
They may as well start giving out little league participation prizes.

Apple Sky said:

Thanks, what happened ?

Click to expand...

I’m surprised that you have not heard. There is even a movie about it. Anyway an oxygen tank exploded on the way to the moon and they were forced to circle the moon and come back home. The astronauts almost died.

AV1611VET said:

Which stands for "Doctor of Philosophy."

These guys are top-notch philosophers.

But bottom-of-the-barrel theologians.

Click to expand...

I was hoping you'd show up .

Warden_of_the_Storm said:

Hvizsgyak, I'm replying like this since this is the only way I can see myself addressing this issue, and after seeing your other comments on this thread, because I... I really cannot figure out your problem.

You say that science should share a stage with Biblical creationism, then you also say that the Enuma Elish should be given the same sort of scrutiny as any other scientific work. You also say in response to Bradskii that you don't understand scientific parlance and that scientists should dumb it down for you and you seem to have no desire to actually want to educate yourself and find that science uses a whole different and particular language set, just the same as any other specialised subject. You seem to have the most basic understanding of science and yet also seem to ONLY want to stick to that basic understanding and think that everything can fit into the basic slot. You mention alternate theories and yet when asked on them you bring up Christian Biblical creationism and the ancient Akkadian creation story, both of which are much more theological than scientific.

I am stuck exactly on what you want from this thread. I really am. Because you're confusing the hell out of me.

Click to expand...

You tried, I appreciate that. What can I say but that I'm just a ordinary common person. I'll do my best not to bother you anymore. I know I can be a pain.

AV1611VET said:

Aquinas can take a hike.

Click to expand...

He did. And that's why he understands divine providence better than those who haven't bothered to learn about it.

AV1611VET said:

I'm asking you if you believe God put Earth into the path of a comet, so it would hit Earth and deliver the oceans?

Let's see what you specifically believe for a change.

Click to expand...

I believe what Jesus says in Matthew.
Matthew 10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father. 30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.

When you understand what He says here, you will have your answer. Did God step in and adjust things or maybe magically create a comet on a collision path with Earth, because He suddenly realized that Earth would need oceans? Or did he create nature so that this would happen as a natural consequence of the order He established at creation?

Given God's omniscience and immortality, a Christian would have to accept the later. Whether this happened as a necessary chain of events, or whether it came about by contingency doesn't matter at all, given an omnipotent Creator Who could do either. You should remember that God does not do miracles because He has to do them. They are done for us, to teach us something.

That's what He said. After all, He used natural processes to create your living body. Why is that so objectionable to you?
(broken record objection)

One of the Superpowers of Learning - Repetition
Login to view embedded media

AV1611VET said:

If you're wondering why God didn't create ME in the same way He created Adam, it's because He finished His creation after six days.

Click to expand...

So you don't think you're a creature of God? Seriously? You couldn't be, if He ceased creation long before you were born. Again, the inherent contradictions in your beliefs are giving you a great deal of trouble understanding His word.

Oompa Loompa said:

Uh huh...and since the 1970's how many women have been in a position of power to make the change an didnt follow through? Show me a so called "feminist" who says they want to be forced to sign up for the draft, and I will show you a liar. If WWIII broke out today, those blue haired middle aged white lesbians will be in the kitchen making sandwiches for a man.

Click to expand...

Show me how many men want to be forced to sign up for the draft? You asked to be shown and you were given data to support their claims to equality. Now you want to whinge about it not getting enacted when they had no power to do so?
I get the sense you just want to complain about those you see as opposed to your world view.

GoldenBoy89 said:

Yes, I am.

Click to expand...

And there we have it. . .