-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
People are Not Animals!
- Thread starter theIdi0t
- Start date
- Status
juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Is there ANY advantage in believing biological evolution? Limited fragmental evidences of evolution really do not deserve such a loyalty from people. The Bible does not say anything about evolution, even figuratively. The Bible does say many times about creation.
Why would people who knows very little about anthropology insist that we are descendants of apes? There must be something going on. Is that the devil's advocate?
Why would people who knows very little about anthropology insist that we are descendants of apes? There must be something going on. Is that the devil's advocate?
Upvote
0
goliwog
Regular Member
hmm i dont know as evolution got a fair representation in that clip ... I thought evolutionists believed that humans and and apes just had commen ancestors ... and I kinda think that God loves animals , after all he created them. At any rate we are not animals and Gods love for us is stronger because we are in his image
Upvote
0
Heh heh heh.
POE!
And here I always thought that the Behemoth was God's favourite creature...
POE!
And here I always thought that the Behemoth was God's favourite creature...
Upvote
0
juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
PaladinValer
Traditional Orthodox Anglican
- Apr 7, 2004
- 23,587
- 1,245
- 44
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Are you sure? There are so many "species" of dinosaurs. I think there should be one similar to the hippo.
Upvote
0
juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes, hippo. Except (as an ignorant one like me can see), the size of the tail does not fit.
Upvote
0
juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Well, I really don't think the evidences are that "overwhelm". At least one can ask as many questions as the number of evidences. Mallon may give us 10 good evidences. But there could be 20 questions raised right there. I do not see why do you call this quality of evidence "overwhelm".
Upvote
0
The passage you're referring to:
(a) Likely describes the penis, rather than the tail
(b) Describes the motion of the appendage to a swaying cedar, not the size.
You need to interpret more literally!
Upvote
0
PaladinValer
Traditional Orthodox Anglican
- Apr 7, 2004
- 23,587
- 1,245
- 44
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
The passage you're referring to:
(a) Likely describes the penis, rather than the tail
(b) Describes the motion of the appendage to a swaying cedar, not the size.
You need to interpret more literally!
My reply to him also, so I'll just quote you and give you the credit.
Upvote
0
Whatever Behemoth is/was, the identity was known to the people to whom Job was written, whether it be something mythological (like a Griffon) or some animal alive and well-known to them. If it was describing some dinosaur species, one would have to demonstrate that dinosaur species were alive a couple thousand years ago. So it's either a common non-dinosaur, or something mythological. I find it pretty tough to swallow that dinosaurs were living at that time and common enough to be spoken about as if one were telling the time, but nowhere to be found now.
Upvote
0
Bushido216
Well-Known Member
- Aug 30, 2003
- 6,383
- 210
- 39
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Engaged
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Biologically the two are about as different as you and the common gecko.
Theoretically a species of dinosaur and a hippo could resemble each other phenotypically, but genotypically they'd be very, very different.
Upvote
0
Bushido216
Well-Known Member
- Aug 30, 2003
- 6,383
- 210
- 39
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Engaged
- Politics
- US-Democrat
That's an incredibly poor line of argumentation, and you should know better than that. Just because you personally don't understand a concept doesn't make it false. Were that the case the greater part of mechanics, engineering, astrophysics, biology and most of theology would all cease to exist.
Personal incredulity is NOT an appropriate line of argumentation.
Either retract this statement OR, the next time you're doing apologetics work, and someone goes "I don't understand", immediately claim that your point is false.
ETA: I should also add that proper science isn't going "well, that point raised a question! It's false!" Proper science is answering the new questions that arise, and then the questions after that, and so on. Not just picking an arbitrary point and stopping.
Upvote
0
juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
The passage you're referring to:
(a) Likely describes the penis, rather than the tail
(b) Describes the motion of the appendage to a swaying cedar, not the size.
You need to interpret more literally!
You may laugh as much as you like to. I am not arguing with you and I don't care. I admit I do not know animals. I am just asking question.
Job 40:17 He moveth his tail like a cedar:
So, I know it does not refer to a penis. I can see the tail of a croc looks like a cedar. What else has that kind of tail? Dino is the only alternative I can imagine.
Upvote
0
PaladinValer
Traditional Orthodox Anglican
- Apr 7, 2004
- 23,587
- 1,245
- 44
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
