human life began in Africa, is this not what the bible tells us?

[Queller]

Originally Posted by Loudmouth

Right. So God's word had to pass through fallible humans. Compare that to the creation which is the direct work of the Creator without needing to pass through humans first.
​

Oh my! Queller agreeing wholeheartedly with an atheist! Now I've seen it all!

Yes, and in post #893 I disagreed with an atheist. Why aren't you pointing that out?

In post #851 I agreed wholeheartedly with a fellow Christian. Why aren't you pointing that out?

On the firmament thread in post #571 I agreed wholeheartedly with a different fellow Christian. Will you be going to that thread and pointing out my agreement and making a fool of yourself pointing that out like you did here?

 

[Queller]

Are you disagreeing with a fellow christian?

Apparently if an atheist pointed out that water was wet and I agreed with them, Aldebaran would make an issue of my Christian beliefs out of it.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yes, and in post #893 I disagreed with an atheist. Why aren't you pointing that out?

In post #851 I agreed wholeheartedly with a fellow Christian. Why aren't you pointing that out?

On the firmament thread in post #571 I agreed wholeheartedly with a different fellow Christian. Will you be going to that thread and pointing out my agreement and making a fool of yourself pointing that out like you did here?

Maybe when these become the majority rather than the 1%.

 

[bhsmte]

Maybe when these become the majority rather than the 1%.

Well, why don't you keep tabs and let us know when it meets your approval.

 

[Queller]

Maybe when these become the majority rather than the 1%.

Let's see your evidence that I only agree with Christians 1% of the time.

You never will because

1. You know the claim is a lie and;

2. For every opinion I have ever given and every statement I have ever made there are Christians who agree with me.

 

[Aldebaran]

Let's see your evidence that I only agree with Christians 1% of the time.

You never will because

1. You know the claim is a lie and;

2. For every opinion I have ever given and every statement I have ever made there are Christians who agree with me.

So what do you want me to do? Am I expected to go back through every post you've ever made and list them all here? Some things just aren't worth my time.

 

[Queller]

So what do you want me to do? Am I expected to go back through every post you've ever made and list them all here? Some things just aren't worth my time.

It certainly seems to be worth your time to make unsubstantiated claims about me.

 

[Hammster]

MOD HAT ON






MOD HAT OFF

 

[Aldebaran]

MOD HAT ON






MOD HAT OFF

Yeah, Queller!

Seriously though. I'm trying!

 

[Loudmouth]

Yeah, Queller!

Seriously though. I'm trying!

Would you disagree with Francis Collins, your fellow christian?

"The tragedy of young-earth creationism is that it takes a relatively recent and extreme view of Genesis, applies to it an unjustified scientific gloss, and then asks sincere and well-meaning seekers to swallow this whole, despite the massive discordance with decades of scientific evidence from multiple disciplines. Is it any wonder that many sadly turn away from faith concluding that they cannot believe in a God who asks for an abandonment of logic and reason?"--Francis Collins, "Faith and the Human Genome"

 

[Aldebaran]

Would you disagree with Francis Collins, your fellow christian?

"The tragedy of young-earth creationism is that it takes a relatively recent and extreme view of Genesis, applies to it an unjustified scientific gloss, and then asks sincere and well-meaning seekers to swallow this whole, despite the massive discordance with decades of scientific evidence from multiple disciplines. Is it any wonder that many sadly turn away from faith concluding that they cannot believe in a God who asks for an abandonment of logic and reason?"--Francis Collins, "Faith and the Human Genome"

We can either use what some call "logic and reason" (also known as parroting what others say), or we can use faith, as God tells us:

Hebrews 11--
11 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

 

[Loudmouth]

We can either use what some call "logic and reason" (also known as parroting what others say), or we can use faith, as God tells us:

Hebrews 11--
11 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

Hebrews was written by Paul, not God. That is what is called using "logic and reason". If you can't tell the difference between a man and a deity, perhaps you should start there.

 

[Aldebaran]

Hebrews was written by Paul, not God. That is what is called using "logic and reason". If you can't tell the difference between a man and a deity, perhaps you should start there.

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

 

[Loudmouth]

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

Yet another verse written by a man.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yet another verse written by a man.

Was any of your scientific theories not written by men (or women)?

 

[Loudmouth]

Was any of your scientific theories not written by men (or women)?

None of the evidence for those theories was written by men. That's the difference. When we say that a genome has this, or a fossil has this, it doesn't depend on a single human for that to be true. The facts in science are completely independent of humans.

For creationism, the entire thing is based solely on what men have written in books. None of it is based on independent evidence.

 

[Aldebaran]

None of the evidence for those theories was written by men. That's the difference. When we say that a genome has this, or a fossil has this, it doesn't depend on a single human for that to be true. The facts in science are completely independent of humans.

For creationism, the entire thing is based solely on what men have written in books. None of it is based on independent evidence.

I didn't ask if the "evidence" for those theories was written by men. I asked you if the theories were. Nice try though!

 

[Loudmouth]

I didn't ask if the "evidence" for those theories was written by men. I asked you if the theories were. Nice try though!

I explained how the evidence for those theories were not written by men. It is entirely possible that the theories men have constructed are wrong. The point is that you can determine if a theory is wrong BY LOOKING AT THE EVIDENCE. How do you determine if creationism is wrong?

 

[AV1611VET]

The point is that you can determine if a theory is wrong BY LOOKING AT THE EVIDENCE.

Wasn't it evidence that created that theory in the first place?

Does Phlogiston come to mind?

 

[RealityCheck01]

Wasn't it evidence that created that theory in the first place?

Does Phlogiston come to mind?

That confirms Loudmouth's point that if you look at the evidence then you can determine if a theory is incorrect (Phlogiston) or correct (evolution), AV1611VET.
Evidence creates a theory, e.g. the massive amount of evidence that Darwin collected or all of the astronomy observations behind Newtonian gravity.
More evidence confirms or invalidates a theory.