Science Says NO to Evolution Theory!

[joshua 1 9]

I find it amazing that some people can be consistently wrong about everything. You would think that they could accidently be right about something along the way, but alas they are not.

Congrats, you just single handedly falsified the theory of evolution. You would think something good would come out of all the mistakes, errors and mutation. Yet there does not seem to be any substantial evidence to that effect.

 

[dad]

As long as their has been a Bible their have been scoffers and doubters.

Even before, they had that sort of wickedness in Noah's day.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

. . . .
Mistake in my opinion for women to vote, since they have since pushed for baby killing, the destruction of family, and etc. I think they were better off as moms and homemakers.

So in your opinion it was wrong for Deborah to be a judge. Well, I disagree with you . . . again.

 

[dad]

So in your opinion it was wrong for Deborah to be a judge. Well, I disagree with you . . . again.

No. God arranged that. Notice she did good things, rather than kill babies and be rebellios to her natural use?

 

[Goonie]

No. God arranged that. Notice she did good things, rather than kill babies and be rebellios to her natural use?

"Natural use"?!! There is so much much that could be said, but it would contravene site rules.

 

[lasthero]

As long as there has been a Bible there has been believers.

And disbelievers. So you're prophecy is about on the same level as my prophecy that the sun will rise tomorrow and that water will take the shape of its container.

 

[crjmurray]

"Natural use"?!! There is so much much that could be said, but it would contravene site rules.

Yet the site is fine with saying women have a natural use and that they shouldn't be allowed to vote. Weird, right?!?!

 

[Goonie]

Yet the site is fine with saying women have a natural use and that they shouldn't be allowed to vote. Weird, right?!?!

Agreed though I was more talking about expletives and really ridiculing someone. The idea of 'natural use' is decidedly mysoginistic in implication.

 

[AV1611VET]

"Natural use"?!!

Yes.

Natural use.

Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

You don't use a hammer to drive screws, do you?

 

[RickG]

You don't use a hammer to drive screws, do you?

Kind of like posting apologetics and calling it science. Eh....?

 

[AV1611VET]

Kind of like posting apologetics and calling it science. Eh....?

Science needs to be scrutinized by apologetics; just like apologetics is scrutinized by science.

I call that: Boolean standards.

 

[RickG]

Science needs to be scrutinized by apologetics; just like apologetics is scrutinized by science.

I call that: Boolean standards.

I agree apologetics scrutinizes science, i.e. creation science. However, I challenge you to cite a single paper published in the mainstream physical science literature that addresses apologetics. Hint, I won't be holding my breath.

 

[AV1611VET]

I challenge you to cite a single paper published in the mainstream physical science literature that addresses apologetics.

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than it is for a work on apologetics to be published in the mainstream physical science literature.

 

[whois]

I agree apologetics scrutinizes science, i.e. creation science. However, I challenge you to cite a single paper published in the mainstream physical science literature that addresses apologetics. Hint, I won't be holding my breath.

i believe you will find a great deal of papers dealing with the concepts of god and its implications in the philosophical sciences.

 

[AV1611VET]

i believe you will find a great deal of papers dealing with the concepts of god and its implications in the philosophical sciences.

That's probably why Rick said 'mainstream.'

I wouldn't know though.

 

[lasthero]

i believe you will find a great deal of papers dealing with the concepts of god and its implications in the philosophical sciences.

What are the 'philosophical sciences'?

 

[dad]

"Natural use"?!! There is so much much that could be said, but it would contravene site rules.

That is a direct bible verse actually. Relax.

 

[dad]

Agreed though I was more talking about expletives and really ridiculing someone. The idea of 'natural use' is decidedly mysoginistic in implication.

Too bad, it is God's word.

 

[dad]

Yes.

Natural use.

Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

You don't use a hammer to drive screws, do you?

Thanks, I was just going to look that verse up, it is the one I was thinking of.

 

[Goonie]

That is a direct bible verse actually. Relax.

thanks for the context, no less offensive. God's word, or Bronze Age mans word hmm.