is it consistant or hypicritical to one's faith to believe that one exists but not th

[Hnefi]

that is because you look at what i say from the wrong perspective. you haven't figured it out yet.

From what perspective is 1+2 = 78? From what perspective is rock more permeable than water? From what perspective is a second shorter than an hour?

Your misunderstandings do not have anything to do with perspective. It's simply wrong.

sorry, but i don't follow secular science's rules, i follow the way God wants me to post it which means you may or may not get what you want.

But if your deity wants you to be ignorant and/or dishonest, does he not better fit the description of the fallen than the christian creator? You may have noticed that not even other creationists seem to support you in your arguments. Does that not tell you something? Noone - regardless of faith - shows support for your position (as far as I can tell, anyway).

not at all. i was just reminding everyone that there is/was another way to look at things until evolution clouded the issue and tries to hide the truth.

Evolution is not an attempt to hide the truth. It is an attempt to expose it, and it has been very successful. That you choose to walk in the darkness of ignorance is not the fault of evolutionary theory.

i am reminded of the George Carlin monologue on the politcal correctness effect on veterans. he made a good point. post traumatic stress is a p.c. term which confuses a lot of experts concerning treatment. he observed that ifwe called it what it was called in world war I, and maybe II, 'shellshocked' experts would understand what it was and could treat the malady.

whether he is right or not, i don't care, it is his observation that is illuminating as evolution, like p.c., clouds issues and confuses people sothat they are seeing something that isn't there while missing what is.

If that were the case, there would be an alternative explanation that explained the development of species and the mathematical characteristics of indeterministic heuristics better than evolution. There isn't, at least not yet. You are free to provide one and if you succeed, there is a Nobel prize waiting for you. And that is neither sarcasm nor exaggeration.

your thinly disguised insult isignored as is the rest of the paragraph. learn to think instead of blindly accepting evolution.

I have tried very hard not to insult you. Please don't try to make yourself into a martyr, because you seem to have no followers who would benefit from it.

both are just smoke screens and excuses. i remember during the O.J. Simpson case where the prosecution said they had a massive amount of evidence to convict him of murder. the problem was, none of that evidence could prove he was evenat the scene of the crime at the time and when push came to shove, their most damming piece of 'evidence' did not fit.

the same for evolution, they cry and scream that they have a massive amount of evidence yet not one piece proves evolutionexists oris responsible for what we see inthe world today.

Whatever happened during the OJ trial, it has nothing to do with evolution. Science is not a legal process, nor is it determined by a jury of the uninformed.

Some of the evidence for evolution has been shown to you. The link I gave you is one such example. I'm rather sure you didn't even read it, so please tell me this: if someone came along and claimed that all christians are babykillers because the bible says so, and it turns out that this person has never read a bible in his life, would you consider his opinion valid?

You're essentially doing the same thing. You cry for evidence, but when you are led to it you refuse to read it. You then go back to crying for evidence. That is dishonest.

the most damming piece of evidence aginst them is the fact, which i quoted in another post and possibly thread, is that they do not know the original conditions which sparked evolution into existence in the first place;

they cannot reproduce such origin in the laboratory to back their words up;

But that has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Yet again you demonstrate your lack of understanding of it.

Evolution presupposes that life exists and explains what happens once that presupposition is true. It's essentially a huge if(life == true), then (a lot of stuff) statement. It only works as long as there is life. What happened before is a separate area of science, one that hasn't come very far yet.

But asserting that evolution is false because the origin of life, the universe and everything has not yet been explained is like asserting that gravity doesn't exist because the origin of the space-time continuum has not yet been explained. The two positions are identical, only applied to different areas of science. And both positions are ludicrous.

they cannot explain why only one planet among the myriads has evolution present (another fatal flaw of evolution);

Actually, they can. I don't have time to give the full explanation right now, but I'll give you a few reasons from the top off my head:
1: We can only directly observe 9 planets and their moons. We can measure the atmospheric composition of a few others (less than 10, I believe). That is a sample of less than 20, which hardly qualifies as "myriads". Whether evolution has occured on any other planet is currently unknown, because we simply lack the technical equipment required to make the measurements that could tell us.
2: In order for evolution to occur, there must be life. In order for life to exist, there must be liquid water. In order for liquid water to exist, a planet must orbit its sun at a certain distance. Few observed planets do so, which means few observed planets can support life.
3: Once life exists and succeeds to procreate, the chance of evolution occurring is 100%. However, the chance for life to appear might not be so good. Current evidence suggests that it took one billion years for the simplest life forms on earth to form. This suggests that it is very difficult for life to rise from non-life and the event would therefore be expected to be rare.

they cannot demonstrate the process is actually responsible for life and its changes;

Yes, they can. And we have provided links to the evidence. All you need to do is to actually read and understand it.

they cannot overcome the fact that everything takes place as instituted by God's creative act and as a result of the fall of man.

Beside the fact that you can't prove (or rather, describe a test that could falsify the position) that God exists and is active anymore than you can prove that there is no invisible dragon in my garage (I call him Burt), you are wrong. Evolution is demonstrated, both in laboratories and in nature, every day. Exploiting the mechanisms of evolution is part of any basic university course on developmental biology and companies such as Astra Zenica have made billions in profits in taking advantage of it to develop their products. The evidence you've been linked to describes and explains mountains of evidence found that shows that the development of species were and are due to evolutionary mechanisms.

**i can go on but i think that is enough to prove the fallacy of evolution.

All it proves is your ignorance, I'm afraid. You won't convince anyone until your arguments are derived from a sound factual basis. You're just alternating between repeating PRATTs and making stuff up as you go along.

I'm trying really hard not to insult you, but it's very difficult due to your attitude and ignorance. Please remedy at least one of them, if you can't remedy both.

 

[archaeologist]

Your misunderstandings do not have anything to do with perspective. It's simply wrong

you still miss it and you still love to insult.

But if your deity wants you to be ignorant and/or dishonest, does he not better fit the description of the fallen than the christian creator

another thinly disguised insult. i am not ignorant nor dishonest, i have provided reasonable possibilities which you dismiss because you want to believe evolution is true when it does not exist.

Evolution is not an attempt to hide the truth. It is an attempt to expose it, and it has been very successful. That you choose to walk in the darkness of ignorance is not the fault of evolutionary theory

i have made many please to TE's to show where the scriptural support is for evolution. so far all they have come up with is one phrase twisted out of context.

evolution can't be exposing the truth for it omits The Truth--Jesus. i would re-think your paragraph.

If that were the case, there would be an alternative explanation that explained the development of species and the mathematical characteristics of indeterministic heuristics better than evolution. There isn't, at least not yet. You are free to provide one and if you succeed, there is a Nobel prize waiting for you. And that is neither sarcasm nor exaggeration.

its been done already---it is called The Bible. science has no say in this matter and basically just is out of its league.

Whatever happened during the OJ trial, it has nothing to do with evolution. Science is not a legal process, nor is it determined by a jury of the uninformed

you missed the point. no, science is a group of people , looking at a white elephant and all are syaing, 'hey this is a pink rhino.'

Some of the evidence for evolution has been shown to you. The link I gave you is one such example. I'm rather sure you didn't even read it, so please tell me this: if someone came along and claimed that all christians are babykillers because the bible says so, and it turns out that this person has never read a bible in his life, would you consider his opinion valid

this same accusation is used by those who do not believe in God and have read the Bible. you canshow me all the 'evidence' you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the Bible is true and evolution doesn't exist.

there are far more factors involved than you admit.

But that has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Yet again you demonstrate your lack of understanding of it.

yes it does and no i'm not. you are certainly showing how much you are fooling yourself.

It only works as long as there is life

in the evolutionist beginning, there was no life? where did that original life form come from? how did evolution come into existence?

Yes, they can

no, they can't. all they can do is infer. i have listened to their lectures, read their articles and books and not one has proof that evolution exists. it is all blind faith.

All it proves is your ignorance, I'm afraid. You won't convince anyone until your arguments are derived from a sound factual basis.

not at all as everything you have 'cited' have already acknowledge that they believe evolution is a fact and they consider no other possibility is considered. i have givenother possibilities but they are dismissed because people want to believe in evolution, not God.

I'm trying really hard not to insult you, but it's very difficult due to your attitude and ignorance. Please remedy at least one of them, if you can't remedy both.

ha ha ha. your arrogance and elitism blinds you to reality. your appeal to a moral decision shows that it wasn't moral at all as you still consider me to be like those insults.

your writing reminds me of 3 mechanics and a bystander. the bystander comes across 3 mechanics working on an engine and he asks what is wrong. the car won't run they replied. so the bystander looks for a minute and akes a suggestion and the mechanics ask, have you studied engines for years like we have--no the bystanders says-- then you do not understand engines and don't know a thing.

the bystander is about to go when he points down to the ground and says, maybe it will work if you put the key in the ignition.

God does things that science cannot understand, he provides a way for His people not to be led astray and even though we are not evolutionists struggling to get their theory to work, He does reveal to us, why it won't and we are not ignorant, stupid, lying, mis-representing, or whatever adjective you like to use.

we listen to God not man and we know.

 

[Hnefi]

you still miss it and you still love to insult.

I did not insult you. If you think I did, stop whining, report me and let the mods deal with it.

another thinly disguised insult. i am not ignorant nor dishonest, i have provided reasonable possibilities which you dismiss because you want to believe evolution is true when it does not exist.

But you continually demonstrate your ignorance. You have provided no possibilites and my dismissals were clearly explained and detailed - explanations you didn't even respond to.

i have made many please to TE's to show where the scriptural support is for evolution. so far all they have come up with is one phrase twisted out of context.

evolution can't be exposing the truth for it omits The Truth--Jesus. i would re-think your paragraph.

I can give no scriptural support, because as far as I know there is none. But that is irrelevant, because I don't believe that scripture is anything more than myth. It is also irrelevant because scripture does not explain everything there is to explain. It does not, for example, have anything to say about electricity or computers, yet here you are, typing away at an electronic computer. If computers are possible despite not being mentioned in scripture, why wouldn't evolution be? The secular evidence that they work is about as solid in either case.

its been done already---it is called The Bible. science has no say in this matter and basically just is out of its league.

It's the other way around. Explaining the natural world around is exactly what science does. Science can not make any statement about the supernatural, but as long as a natural explanation exists, science can find it. Evolution is one such natural explanation, and it's a very well-evidenced and useful one at that.

this same accusation is used by those who do not believe in God and have read the Bible. you canshow me all the 'evidence' you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the Bible is true and evolution doesn't exist.

This is extremely illuminating. Basically, what you are saying is this: "regardless of the evidence, I am right and everyone else is wrong!". You're simply admitting that you are ignoring everything the world can show you about itself and instead irrationally place all your belief in a book.

So what is the point? Why do you even try to argue about science? Why do you ask for evidence when you yourself admit that you will simply ignore it - isn't that dishonest? Why didn't you just admit that you don't care about reality from the start? It would have saved us a lot of time and effort.

in the evolutionist beginning, there was no life? where did that original life form come from? how did evolution come into existence?

That's right, in the beginning there was no life. How life arose from nonlife has not been discovered. The area of science dealing with this is called abiogenesis, but it is a very difficult area of investigation because it happened so long ago on such a small scale. So far, no satisfactory explanation has been found. We will probably have to wait a few decades more for one to be discovered.

Evolution, as a process, has existed for as long as our physical laws have. Biological evolution has existed since the moment the first organic lifeform replicated.

no, they can't. all they can do is infer. i have listened to their lectures, read their articles and books and not one has proof that evolution exists. it is all blind faith.

That you refuse to consider the evidence or lack the ability to understand it does not dimish its correctness. But even if what you say were true, why do you rile on others relying on faith when you yourself admit that you have nothing else to stand on, and would consider nothing else even if it were presented to you?

not at all as everything you have 'cited' have already acknowledge that they believe evolution is a fact and they consider no other possibility is considered. i have givenother possibilities but they are dismissed because people want to believe in evolution, not God.

Of course they consider other possibilities. Before Darwin's original theory was accepted, it was in direct competition with several others. Only his survived. New research on evolution occurs constantly and the theory is continually revised. Darwin's original theory has been amended by new concepts and corrections so many times that only the core remains. All these changes are new ideas that were incorporated into the theory in order to improve it to better explain reality.

ha ha ha. your arrogance and elitism blinds you to reality. your appeal to a moral decision shows that it wasn't moral at all as you still consider me to be like those insults.

your writing reminds me of 3 mechanics and a bystander. the bystander comes across 3 mechanics working on an engine and he asks what is wrong. the car won't run they replied. so the bystander looks for a minute and akes a suggestion and the mechanics ask, have you studied engines for years like we have--no the bystanders says-- then you do not understand engines and don't know a thing.

the bystander is about to go when he points down to the ground and says, maybe it will work if you put the key in the ignition.

What you described has little to do with this situation. It's more like the bystander asking if the windshield is dry enough, if the doors are closed or if the trunk is empty. None of these things have anything to do with whether the car runs or not, yet the bystander thinks they do. At that point, obviously the engineer will dismiss him.

Your example above exposes a common fantasy among the uneducated; that education is only an unnessecary, elitist waste of time and that common sense and humility will get you further when it comes to technical decisions. It's a nice fantasy, one that fits well in TV series and books, but has little to do with reality.

God does things that science cannot understand, he provides a way for His people not to be led astray and even though we are not evolutionists struggling to get their theory to work, He does reveal to us, why it won't and we are not ignorant, stupid, lying, mis-representing, or whatever adjective you like to use.

we listen to God not man and we know.

Since others who say they listen to God say that you are wrong, why should I take your word for it instead of theirs?

 

[notto]

i have provided reasonable possibilities

You have provided unsupported assertion.

What evidence makes your possibility reasonable (or even probable or possible)?

Did I miss the sources and links?

Your possibilities are unreasonable (and nonsensical). Care to show us otherwise? Then start the discussion with an explanation of the mechanisms involved.

 

[shernren]

ha ha ha. your arrogance and elitism blinds you to reality.

... ever wondered what would happen if all the irony-meters in the world exploded simultaneously?

Nothing, it seems, because they just did.

Pray tell, archie, if evolutionists are "struggling to get their theory to work": Precisely what haven't they figured out yet? Please supply credible links (i.e. peer-reviewed scientific papers) to support your arguments.

 

[Assyrian]

I wonder how that would work. Do they all go instantaneously or does it spread out in a shockwave? What is the speed of irony?

It must be true though because I searched on e-bay and there are no irony meters available at all.

 

[archaeologist]

This is extremely illuminating. Basically, what you are saying is this: "regardless of the evidence, I am right and everyone else is wrong!". You're simply admitting that you are ignoring everything the world can show you about itself and instead irrationally place all your belief in a book

when Jesus went to the parents home of the girl who died, what did He say in the face of all the 'evidence'? 'she is just sleeping' .

when it comes to a choice between God and man, I take God every time. secular science has no evidence, they have interpretation and interpretation is not truth; Jesus is The Truth, God does not lie thus if you take man's evidence over God's book you just picked a losing horse.

How life arose from nonlife has not been discovered

right. you are basng your eternal soul on what cannot be fathomed by secular science but must fill inthe blanks with conjecture.

out of all the thousands of years man has been in existence, there has never been one observation or recording of life independently starting from nothing. in fact, there is not one thing on this planet that has ever come from nothing.

doesn't that give you a clue?

Evolution, as a process, has existed for as long as our physical laws have

you are not answering my questions plus you stated that as long as their is life there is evolution. now you are saying that evolution existed before there was life.

so are you equating evolution with God? how did evolution come into existence?

That you refuse to consider the evidence or lack the ability to understand it does not dimish its correctness.

there is no evidence, i have studied it long before coming to this forum and with God's help have seen its errors and impossibilities. your believing it, doesn't make it true, correct, right or real. you are being deceived.

All these changes are new ideas that were incorporated into the theory in order to improve it to better explain reality.

which makes the theory subject to man's interpretations (and i know evolutionists disagree over the theory), popular thought, majority rule and under man's control.

whereas the Biblical account of creation is subject only to God and out of the control of man, never changes, (which truth is supposed to do), and is constant throughout the ages so that all men have equal opportunity to believe (evolution doesn't do that), which means God remains just and no complaint can be lodged against Him for playing favorites, hiding information and so on.

you think it is only the origin of man that is at stake here?

At that point, obviously the engineer will dismiss him

which is my cue to dismiss you then as you have no clue how God works, what is at stake, nor do you have any idea concerning the origin of man, life, the universe, etc.

you have chosen to follow that which God said not to and ignored what He said to follow. you can have your evidence but it won't lead you to God.

Pray tell, archie, if evolutionists are "struggling to get their theory to work": Precisely what haven't they figured out yet? Please supply credible links (i.e. peer-reviewed scientific papers) to support your arguments.

1. how life started from nothing
2. how all things came into being
3. how God works
4. how to prove a non-existent theory real.
5. how to determine between 'evolution' and the results of the fall of man
6. the workings of the evil one
7. how to interpret evidence

etc.

 

[KokoTheGorilla2]

Noone - regardless of faith - shows support for your position (as far as I can tell, anyway)

Koko supporting Archie!

 

[Hnefi]

when it comes to a choice between God and man, I take God every time. secular science has no evidence, they have interpretation and interpretation is not truth; Jesus is The Truth, God does not lie thus if you take man's evidence over God's book you just picked a losing horse.

We have evidence, you just choose not to look at it. That is your choice, of course, but don't ask for evidence if you don't even have the intention of considering it.

I also wonder why you've started preaching. You've done your best to prevent anyone from reading your posts to convert to christianity already, so why preach?

right. you are basng your eternal soul on what cannot be fathomed by secular science but must fill inthe blanks with conjecture.

Christianity doesn't provide any answers either. "Goddidit" is no more informative than "FSM got drunk and created us for fun". I also don't turn to science for the "ultimate" answers, such as the meaning of life and the like, because science does not deal in philosophy or morals. I only turn to science when science has something to say. The origin of life, therefore, is an issue where I simply say "I don't know", because I don't (and neither does anyone else right now). It's the honest thing to do.

out of all the thousands of years man has been in existence, there has never been one observation or recording of life independently starting from nothing. in fact, there is not one thing on this planet that has ever come from nothing.

doesn't that give you a clue?

A hundred years ago, the same thing could be said for atoms. Fifty years ago, the same could be said about DNA. Ten years ago, the same could be said about neutrinos.

That we have not had any recorded occasions of life arising from nonlife is not surprising. The event would probably result in a very fragile form of life that would be almost instantly consumed by the microbes that already exist and leave no trace behind. It would also happen on the microscopic scale, which is only observable with special equipment.

I should also point out that noone is claiming that life arose from nothing. That is a strawman. As far as we can determine, life seems to have risen from organic (as in carbon-based) molecules, since that's what life is made of today. That's not life from nothing, it's life from nonlife.

you are not answering my questions plus you stated that as long as their is life there is evolution. now you are saying that evolution existed before there was life.

I have answered pretty much every question you've asked so far. You, however, have ignored several entire posts and large parts of others. Don't throw stones in glass houses.

Anyway, I said that evolution as a process has "always" existed. That's because evolution is a mathematical phenomenon, a direct consequence of what we call statistics. The biggest example of evolution that we have is, however, biological evolution, and that particular phenomenon has only existed for as long as life has. That's what I said, nothing else.

so are you equating evolution with God? how did evolution come into existence?

Where did I say that? Don't put words in my mouth. Evolution is not sentient, omniscient (or even sentient), omnipotent or anything else that is usually attributed to god. It's simply a physical process, like mechanics. You might as well ask "how did the fact that 1 + 1 = 2 come into existance". The answer is that since it is a consequence of our physical reality, it came into existance in the same way that existance itself did. I consider the entire question (and its answer) to be pretty meaningless though.

there is no evidence, i have studied it long before coming to this forum and with God's help have seen its errors and impossibilities. your believing it, doesn't make it true, correct, right or real. you are being deceived.

This is getting tiresome. You have already admitted that you don't care about evidence, and you have demonstrated that you ignore us when we present it to you. If you keep claiming to be well-researched on the subject of evolution while demonstrating that you are not, I would be forced to consider you a liar.

which makes the theory subject to man's interpretations (and i know evolutionists disagree over the theory), popular thought, majority rule and under man's control.

More or less. Just like scripture. Why else would there be so many religions and denominations?

whereas the Biblical account of creation is subject only to God and out of the control of man, never changes, (which truth is supposed to do), and is constant throughout the ages so that all men have equal opportunity to believe (evolution doesn't do that), which means God remains just and no complaint can be lodged against Him for playing favorites, hiding information and so on.

So what about the humans that lived before scripture was recorded? What about all those that were never exposed to it? What about all those that never learned to read?

And indeed, if what you say is true, then why are there so many different versions of the bible? Why are there so many different interpretations and denominations? The disagreements scientists have over evolution are trivial compared to the disagreements christians have over scripture.

you think it is only the origin of man that is at stake here?

I don't think the origin of man is at stake here, because that event has already passed.

which is my cue to dismiss you then as you have no clue how God works, what is at stake, nor do you have any idea concerning the origin of man, life, the universe, etc.

So you claim to know the mind of god? Howcome noone (except Koko the Gorilla) seems to agree with you? Does god only reveal himself to you?

you have chosen to follow that which God said not to and ignored what He said to follow. you can have your evidence but it won't lead you to God.

When did god tell us not to explore the world? In fact, isn't there scripture that tell us the exact opposite (TE's usually cite something about revealing the hidden glory of god or somesuch).

I'm sure secular science won't lead me to god, but then I never claimed it would. So why do you even bring it up?

1. how life started from nothing
2. how all things came into being
3. how God works
4. how to prove a non-existent theory real.
5. how to determine between 'evolution' and the results of the fall of man
6. the workings of the evil one
7. how to interpret evidence

etc.

1: It didn't, and noone claims it did.
2: Noone knows, and honest people admit that.
3: Do you know that?
4: The theory obviously exists, otherwise we wouldn't discuss it. That it's correct is evidenced by all those things you refuse to look at.
5: That's a weakness of your hypothesis, not evolution, because while evolution is falsifiable your hypothesis is not.
6: Who?
7: That's something we are willing to teach you. Simply enroll into an accredited college or university and take some courses in the natural sciences and maths.

 

[Vambram]

Koko supporting Archie!

I support archie, also. When it comes to questions about origin theology, one can choose to believe the Bible, or one can choose to believe evolutionists. As for me? I shall always and forever believe what the Lord GOD and Creator of the universe has revealed in the Scriptures. I believe what the Bible says about not only Creation, but also everything else which is in the Bible.

 

[shernren]

1. how life started from nothing
2. how all things came into being
3. how God works
4. how to prove a non-existent theory real.
5. how to determine between 'evolution' and the results of the fall of man
6. the workings of the evil one
7. how to interpret evidence

etc.

... right back atcha, buddy. Two can play this game.

Please supply credible links (i.e. peer-reviewed scientific papers) to support your arguments.

Until you can show me peer-reviewed scientific papers in which scientists admit that any of these things have anything to do with evolution in the first place, I have every right to say you're talking nonsense. In fact, I'd have every right to hurl every single insulting word and phrase you've been spewing at us for the past two months right back in your face.

I'm a nice guy though.

So. Where's the data?

 

[archaeologist]

... right back atcha, buddy. Two can play this game.

????? what is your point?

Until you can show me peer-reviewed scientific papers in which scientists admit that any of these things have anything to do with evolution in the first place, I have every right to say you're talking nonsense

hiding behind secular man's ways, that figures. God doesn't work through peer review.

I also wonder why you've started preaching. You've done your best to prevent anyone from reading your posts to convert to christianity already, so why preach

this makes no sense whatsoever but is par for the course from you.

Christianity doesn't provide any answers either.

christianity does provide all the answers because it is founded in Christ, has the Bible the Holy Spirit and yes, God did it is enough.

it is only lacking by those who refuse to use faith.

because I don't (and neither does anyone else right now). It's the honest thing to do.

that is news to those of us who do know and believe the Bible. the honest thing to do is, if you say you believe in God then you stand upon its words, saying something different means you are a hypocrite.

I should also point out that noone is claiming that life arose from nothing

please read the other posts and threads as they say differently than you. but generally speaking TE's claim God started it so that they are off 'the hook', so to speak, but they are as wrong as secular evolutionists.

Anyway, I said that evolution as a process has "always" existed. That's because evolution is a mathematical phenomenon, a direct consequence of what we call statistics. The biggest example of evolution that we have is, however, biological evolution, and that particular phenomenon has only existed for as long as life has. That's what I said, nothing else

darwin would be surprised to hear that but as stated in another thread Gen. 1:31 squashes any idea of evolution existing or being used of God.

please link where you can prove that evolution is a mthematical phenomenom.

It's simply a physical process

who programmed it? but it doesn't exist so this is a moot point anyways.

So what about the humans that lived before scripture was recorded? What about all those that were never exposed to it? What about all those that never learned to read?

there was Noah, there was melchizadek (sp), and others so that the world has not been without a witness to salvation or God.

This is getting tiresome. You have already admitted that you don't care about evidence, and you have demonstrated that you ignore us when we present it to you

you are not presenting evidence, just your interpretation of it. you cannot verify one iota of what you say.

So why do you even bring it up?

why do you accept it then/

When did god tell us not to explore the world?

read the thread 'when did God say...' and 1 John 3:1-10.

And indeed, if what you say is true, then why are there so many different versions of the bible? Why are there so many different interpretations and denominations? The disagreements scientists have over evolution are trivial compared to the disagreements christians have over scripture.

do you know the story of the wheat and the tares? or the scripture which warns us about the evil one disguising himself as an angel of flight? or the verses which talks about false teachers? etc....

So you claim to know the mind of god? Howcome noone (except Koko the Gorilla) seems to agree with you? Does god only reveal himself to you?

God reveals Himself to all who seek Him honestly but you have to listen to His words first and not change them to allow the world to be a part of your search.

If you do not believe His words, how can you determine what is of God or not?

1: It didn't, and noone claims it did.
2: Noone knows, and honest people admit that.
3: Do you know that?
4: The theory obviously exists, otherwise we wouldn't discuss it. That it's correct is evidenced by all those things you refuse to look at.
5: That's a weakness of your hypothesis, not evolution, because while evolution is falsifiable your hypothesis is not.
6: Who?
7: That's something we are willing to teach you. Simply enroll into an accredited college or university and take some courses in the natural sciences and maths.

1. yes they do, please read other posts and the theory itself.
2.those who believe God do know.
3. yes, His word is quite clear, His ways aare not our ways, His thoughts are higher than our thoughts and so on. the Bible is quite clear how God works.
4.that is the deception, it doesn't but we are talking about it because people are deceived and are being led astray.
5. again with the secular criteria. God doesn't go according to man. it is manwho is supposed to go according to God.
6.if you don't know then i would suggest studying up on him.
7.secular science's ways cannot interpret what God has done. that is proven over and over and a believer stays away from following the world and looks to the Holy Spirit to guide them. again read 1 John 3:1-10.

 

[shernren]

hiding behind secular man's ways, that figures. God doesn't work through peer review.

Essentially, you have no evidence. I've asked you for evidence two times and you haven't supplied any.

 

[Hnefi]

this makes no sense whatsoever but is par for the course from you.

Then I'll clarify. Your arrogance, hostile attitude and refusal to listen only makes those of us who are not already christian much less inclined to start believing. You give no moral, emotional and certainly no intellectual incentive to change our beliefs. Therefore, preaching about the glory of god is rather meaningless since you're already doing a great job of turning us away from him, should he exist.

christianity does provide all the answers because it is founded in Christ, has the Bible the Holy Spirit and yes, God did it is enough.

it is only lacking by those who refuse to use faith.

Then I can say the same thing about the FSM or Ymir or whatever other deity people can dream up.

that is news to those of us who do know and believe the Bible. the honest thing to do is, if you say you believe in God then you stand upon its words, saying something different means you are a hypocrite.

Belief is different from knowledge though. More to the point, your belief in god tells you nothing of the methods he supposedly used, nor his motives. It doesn't help you explain the way the universe works and it doesn't increase our knowledge and awareness of what happens around us.

please read the other posts and threads as they say differently than you. but generally speaking TE's claim God started it so that they are off 'the hook', so to speak, but they are as wrong as secular evolutionists.

I have never, ever seen anyone above the age of 10 claim that life arose from nothing. I've been reading these boards for quite some time and I can't recall ever seeing a statement to that effect. All the atheistic viewpoints on the matter that I've seen agree that there were plenty of matter before life.

please link where you can prove that evolution is a mthematical phenomenom.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_algorithm will explain some applications of the mathematical properties of evolution.

Basically, evolution occurs as soon as imperfect replicators start reproducing in an environment where the individuals compete for limited resources. Since the replication process is imperfect, this will lead to variations in the populations. Those members of the population who are better suited to acquire resources and reproduce will therefore have a higher rate of reproductive success than others, which means the population will continually change and adapt to the environment.

This is not limited to biological entities. It works for any imperfect replicators, and the rate at which the population changes is a matter of statistics.

who programmed it? but it doesn't exist so this is a moot point anyways.

Noone programmed it. As far as I know, reality wasn't programmed by anyone because we don't live inside a computer.

there was Noah, there was melchizadek (sp), and others so that the world has not been without a witness to salvation or God.

You are trying to dodge the question. Despite missionary activity, there have been billions of people throughout the ages who never heard of god or jesus. What about them?

you are not presenting evidence, just your interpretation of it. you cannot verify one iota of what you say.

I already have, as have others. The 29+ evidences for macroevolution I linked earlier is one such example. It's not my fault that you refuse to read, and it doesn't change the fact that you admitted that you don't care about whatever evidence I or others might provide.

why do you accept it then/

Please stop cutting and skipping through my posts, only quoting parts of paragraphs. It makes it difficult to find what statement you responded to.

Anyway, I accept it because it works. I accept that F=m*a, because I can measure and verify it. I accept that copper conducts electricity, because I can build circuits with this knowledge that do what I want them to do. I accept that evolution exists because I can simulate it and use it to improve my designs.

Knowing that water is wet won't lead you to god either, yet you accept it. Why?

read the thread 'when did God say...' and 1 John 3:1-10.

Are you sure you are referring me to the right passage? I see nothing there discouraging the exploration of the world around us.

do you know the story of the wheat and the tares? or the scripture which warns us about the evil one disguising himself as an angel of flight? or the verses which talks about false teachers? etc....

Yes, more or less. Are you saying that all the denominations except one are the product of the devil?

God reveals Himself to all who seek Him honestly but you have to listen to His words first and not change them to allow the world to be a part of your search.

But all original versions of scripture have been lost since centuries ago. Where will we find any copies of gods words that haven't already been changed?

If you do not believe His words, how can you determine what is of God or not?

A better question would be: if you believe what someone is telling you without bothering to check the facts, then how will you ever know if you've been lied to?

1. yes they do, please read other posts and the theory itself.
2.those who believe God do know.
3. yes, His word is quite clear, His ways aare not our ways, His thoughts are higher than our thoughts and so on. the Bible is quite clear how God works.
4.that is the deception, it doesn't but we are talking about it because people are deceived and are being led astray.
5. again with the secular criteria. God doesn't go according to man. it is manwho is supposed to go according to God.
6.if you don't know then i would suggest studying up on him.
7.secular science's ways cannot interpret what God has done. that is proven over and over and a believer stays away from following the world and looks to the Holy Spirit to guide them. again read 1 John 3:1-10.

1: Show me some quotes. As I said earlier, I've never seen anyone make the claim you say they did. The theory of evolution most certainly does not make the claim that life came from nothing.
2: A very small minority of religious people claim they do, and they could be lying or decieving themselves. Most religious people, being honest, admit that they don't know.
3: Really? So then you can predict his behaviour with reasonable accuracy, as well as differentiate between gods actions and event not influenced by him, as well as demonstrate that difference to others?
4: If that's true, then howcome it works in practical applications? Medicine, computer science, breeding crops and animals; in these areas and several more, evolution is applied every day. If we are being led astray, who makes all these things work?
5: But if god doesn't ever give us a reason to believe, why should we? I don't even see any particular reason to think he exists at all.
6: I can't study someone whose identity I don't even know.
7: Proven? Really? Care to show us?

 

[archaeologist]

Your arrogance, hostile attitude and refusal to listen only makes those of us who are not already christian much less inclined to start believing

sorry, i was under the impression you were a TE. my apologies. i have no arrogance or hostile attitude i just object to the conslusions and theories of secular science.

You give no moral, emotional and certainly no intellectual incentive to change our beliefs.

what are you expecting? God is moral and has His own morality which He has communicated to us through the Bible. everyone is basically taught those morals one way or another.

emotional, well i am a guy, don't expect emotionalism from me.

as for intellectual aspects, well, being with God is the cause of an act of faith and how you come to that point is up to God's working. it is also dependent on what you are looking for. if you want to do science, are you looking to continue the world's way or are you open to how God would want you to do it?

you can't have both ways combined, Jesus said to follow Him 'you must pick up your cross...' which means you follow Him and not the world, even in science and even if it means going against secular evidence.

Then I can say the same thing about the FSM or Ymir or whatever other deity people can dream up.

your key words there are the words 'dream up'. God is not the same as all the rest. if you compare creation stories with the genesis account you will find a big difference in them . to quote dr. walter kaiser:

"The Genesis account rejects the central motif of pagan religion: the deification of nature. Interestingly it does not seek to elevate Yawweh over other gods. Indeed, in the 7 day creation account Yaweh is not named; the creator is is simply referred to as "God", a more generic term. Even Genesis 2-3 provides no sense that Yaweh needed to establish his supremacy over other dieties. There is no conquest of other gods or monsters and no shrine or city is said to be the place from which God began the creative process. No sacred object is mentioned. The God of Genesis is indeed the universal God"

if you want morality, emotionalism, intellectualism, investigate that God and not the ones you or others can dream up.

More to the point, your belief in god tells you nothing of the methods he supposedly used, nor his motives

1. methods-- He spoke and it was. yes we know.
2. motives-- He wanted to create us thus we know we are wanted by Him and we never have to feel alone.

It doesn't help you explain the way the universe works and it doesn't increase our knowledge and awareness of what happens around us.

no one says you can't investigate such things BUT if you create a theory which denies God and contradicts His word then you are going to have trouble. origin of everything is not by chance but by God's personal involvement using all the attributes He possesses, none of which are present in the theory of evolution.

I have never, ever seen anyone above the age of 10 claim that life arose from nothing

from the book Origins:14 Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution; page 235-6:

"The origin of life on Earth remains a mystery in murky uncertanty. Our ignorance about life's beginnings stems in large part from the fact that whatever events made inanimate matter come alive 0ccurred billons of years ago and left no definitive traces behind."

basically he is saying that life came from non-life or nothing because where did that 'spark' come from that ignited life on earth according to evolutionary thought?

where did the matter come from that was 'brought to life'?

the math question i will leave for now and skip to the following point:

Noone programmed it. As far as I know, reality wasn't programmed by anyone because we don't live inside a computer.

where did the process come from? if you say it was always there then you equate it with God sans all His attributes and make it into a diety because it transcends mortal life.

how could the process work or even know what to do ? coupling it with 'natural selection' hides some weaknesses but exposes many others.

You are trying to dodge the question. Despite missionary activity, there have been billions of people throughout the ages who never heard of god or jesus. What about them

as i said, God has always left a witness to Him, besides the passage in romans there is another verse i want to use but it eludes me at the moment.

The 29+ evidences for macroevolution I linked earlier is one such example. It's not my fault that you refuse to read, and it doesn't change the fact that you admitted that you don't care about whatever evidence I or others might provide.

here is why (from your link):

None of the dozens of predictions directly address how macroevolution has occurred,

it isn't proof but a guess.

I accept that F=m*a, because I can measure and verify it

but that isn't proof evolution is responsible or exists.

I accept that evolution exists because I can simulate it and use it to improve my designs.

how do you know that you are simulating evolution and not getting a conclusion based upon the result of the fall of man? or that God created it to work in that manner?

Knowing that water is wet won't lead you to god either, yet you accept it. Why?

God uses many things to lead us to Him, even the wetness of water, though it is dependent on more than just water, there is the Holy Spirit who works also. there are always more factors involved than meets the eye.

look at water's uses: you can drink it, cook with it, wash with it, play in it. such versatality cannot be a product of an inanimate process nor of just happening as describe in various secular theories.

there is always something more behind it which sparks man's desire to know God. (there is a verse i want to use but it eludes me at the moment)

Are you sure you are referring me to the right passage? I see nothing there discouraging the exploration of the world around us

yes as it is telling you how to do it if you are a believer and what to avoid. God wants us to get knowledge but He doesn't want you following the world, for the world will lead you astray from the truth.

Yes, more or less. Are you saying that all the denominations except one are the product of the devil?

NO. i am saying you have to be careful because not all who say they are christians are. that is why we rely on the Holy Spirit and the Bible, it teaches us what to look out for and how to checkto see if one is of God or not AND the Holy Spirit will guide us correctly as long as we know it is HIm/it guiding us and not an evil spirit disguised as an angel of light.

But all original versions of scripture have been lost since centuries ago. Where will we find any copies of gods words that haven't already been changed

the basic ones, NIV, KJV, NASV are all good and you have to remember that God has set out criteria that qualifies it as the word of God, made promises to keep it intact, and other factors.

you will also notice that the silver scroll found years ago by, i believe it was, gabriel barkay, an israelite archaeologist and dated to about 7th century b.c., contains within it the exact same words as our modern english bibles:

http://www.crystalinks.com/scrollsilver.html

A better question would be: if you believe what someone is telling you without bothering to check the facts, then how will you ever know if you've been lied to

Jesus said, 'ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free...' plus we have the Holy Spirit to guide and watch over us. so we do have protections in place.

next post i will deal with the list as this one is quite long

 

[Rudolph Hucker]

....
emotional, well i am a guy, don't expect emotionalism from me.

....

Archie - do you want to edit that?

 

[archaeologist]

1: Show me some quotes. As I said earlier, I've never seen anyone make the claim you say they did. The theory of evolution most certainly does not make the claim that life came from nothing.
2: A very small minority of religious people claim they do, and they could be lying or decieving themselves. Most religious people, being honest, admit that they don't know.
3: Really? So then you can predict his behaviour with reasonable accuracy, as well as differentiate between gods actions and event not influenced by him, as well as demonstrate that difference to others?
4: If that's true, then howcome it works in practical applications? Medicine, computer science, breeding crops and animals; in these areas and several more, evolution is applied every day. If we are being led astray, who makes all these things work?
5: But if god doesn't ever give us a reason to believe, why should we? I don't even see any particular reason to think he exists at all.
6: I can't study someone whose identity I don't even know.
7: Proven? Really? Care to show us?

1. sorry but that will take some time as i do not keep a record of where what was said where andi will have to search. i was hioping you had read some of the posts yourself.

2. this depends upon their level of knowledge, acceptance of such knowledge and how deep they want to go with God. many religious people do compomise or accept many scientific conclusions eventhough erroneous or just that they are misguided.

3. we cannot predict God's actions because God does not operate scientifically, please adjust your understanding level of what i wrote and of whom God is. yes, we can tell the difference but it would make this post too long to explain it all but keep in mind, just because an action took place that God didn't do, He still allowed it to take place.

4. again i cannot give you a simple answer, God gave man intelligence, He is not the only supernatural being at work, there are many many answers here.

5.one reason is "we love Him because He first loved us'

6. the devil or satan

7. noah's flood, creation, the ressurrection, heaven, healing, to just name a few areas science cannot fathom what God did.

 

[Rudolph Hucker]

1. sorry but that will take some time as i do not keep a record of where what was said where andi will have to search. i was hioping you had read some of the posts yourself.
...

Bump

 

[theFijian]

4. again i cannot give you a simple answer, God gave man intelligence, He is not the only supernatural being at work, there are many many answers here.

Hey guys! You see what archie is doing here? He's claiming that the only reason 'secular' science works is because the devil deceives those involved. Astounding reasoning!

 

[TomBormat]

You mean the devil runs my coffee maker? Out the window with you, foul spawn of hell!