Is there any evidence for evolution?

[AV1611VET]

Should you worship any idol, be it paper or stone?

If they can "worship" the originals, I certainly can "worship" the final product.

 

[AdamSK]

How many people have you met that started out as Christians and ended up atheists?

None. I have met many people that started out as atheists and became Christians - but not one of them made this change due to attacks on evolution or arguments about creationism.

 

[AdamSK]

Then it’s the vertebrates, mammals and when you get to the genus level you are talking about the level of kind since the words appear to have identical meanings.

Great, now we have a well-defined claim we can evaluate.

Here are the extant cat genera:
Acinonyx
Caracal
Catopuma
Felis
Leopardus
Leptailurus
Lynx
Otocolobus
Pardofelis
Prionailarus
Puma
Panthera
Neofelis

For each of the thirteen, please provide a specific example for a trait that none of the other twelve could ever develop by mutation and natural selection. Also confirm your agreement that all of the fossils showing common ancestors between members of these genera have been misinterpreted or falsified.

 

[Loudmouth]

If they can "worship" the originals, I certainly can "worship" the final product.

So you can worship a Golden Calf, as long as it is the first one?

 

[AV1611VET]

So you can worship a Golden Calf, as long as it is the first one?

Wow.

Is that what these guys are doing?

They're trying to correct me, and probably don't have the faintest idea what a KJVO is.

They get an A for effort though.

 

[Loudmouth]

Wow.

Is that what these guys are doing?

It would appear that is what people do with the Bible, worship it just like the Gold Calf.

 

[AdamSK]

So you can worship a Golden Calf, as long as it is the first one?

Doesn't logically follow. (Worship copy of A) --> (Worship original A) is his argument. That doesn't imply (For all A, worship original A).

 

[AV1611VET]

It would appear that is what people do with the Bible, worship it just like the Gold Calf.

The originals aren't the Bible, chief.

They are called the Scriptures.

 

[Loudmouth]

The originals aren't the Bible, chief.

The are called the Scriptures.

And yet you worship the copies. Go figure.

 

[AdamSK]

And yet you worship the copies. Go figure.

By what criteria are you claiming that anyone is worshiping Scripture?

I venerate Scripture, just as Catholics venerate the Saints. That's not the same as worship.

 

[Loudmouth]

By what criteria are you claiming that anyone is worshiping Scripture?

Just read AV's posts. It goes well beyond veneration. If God showed up and told AV something that went against AV's interpretation of scripture, AV would tell God to take a hike.

 

[David_M]

Read Genesis 9:1 and tell me what you think the nature of those blessings were.

To allow hyper-speed macro-evolution? Because that is the only explanation for the huge amount of speciation required after the "kinds" came off the ark.

 

[AdamSK]

Just read AV's posts. It goes well beyond veneration. If God showed up and told AV something that went against AV's interpretation of scripture, AV would tell God to take a hike.

I would too; we are explicitly instructed that Satan can disguise himself too effectively for us to tell the difference, and that any spirit that contradicts the Gospel we have already received is not from God. Rejecting a vision inconsistent with Scripture as not divine is therefore entirely reasonable.

 

[AV1611VET]

By what criteria are you claiming that anyone is worshiping Scripture?

I venerate Scripture, just as Catholics venerate the Saints. That's not the same as worship.

I get accused of that all the time; and I've seen others accused of it.

Their points aren't valid unless they can append them with an accusation.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Read Genesis 9:1 and tell me what you think the nature of those blessings were.

The Blessing is for the remnant. Evolution knows how God repopulates the earth with a remnant of what was here before the extinction. Remnant: "What is left of a community after it undergoes a catastrophe". God did not spare the world in the day of Noah and He will not spare the world today either. Only a remnant of what is alive today will remain to repopulate the earth for the 1,000 year reign of Christ.

Isaiah 10:22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, [yet] a remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness.

 

[florida2]

If you quoted from a contemporary bible, it's more than likely wrong.

And who cares what Mark knew and didn't know.

He was filled with the Spirit and wrote what God inspired him to write.

Acts 18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
Acts 18:25 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

What if you don't read English? Can you not be a Christian and read the bible if you are, say, French or Spanish or Russian? Or could you have a KJV translation?

 

[AV1611VET]

What if you don't read English? Can you not be a Christian and read the bible if you are, say, French or Spanish or Russian? Or could you have a KJV translation?

I'm under the impression they have the KJV in their own language.

 

[mark kennedy]

The originals aren't the Bible, chief.

They are called the Scriptures.

The originals are called the canon of Scripture, just about as basic as it gets.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[USincognito]

Can you give an objective definition for "kind of animal"?

A dog is a kind of animal. A cat is a kind of animal. A cow is a kind of animal.

Merriam-Webster:
"a group of people or things that belong together or have some shared quality : a particular type or variety of person or thing"

This is just mind blowing and I see it far too often on Internet Crevo debates.

Person 1 - please give a definition for kinds

Person 2 - lists a few barnyard or petting zoo beings and posts the dictionary definition for kind

It's almost as if we're speaking two different languages.

Darwin had no ability to examine chromosomes in his day.

So what? Today we do and the genetic evidence shows we are related to chimpanzees via common ancestry.

He was making tremendous leaps in logic to claim we share a common ancestry with chimpanzees.

Please list these "leaps in logic".

 

[USincognito]

What is your favorite specific evidence for one kind of animal changing to another kind of animal?

We need to establish that you don't have a straw man understanding of evolution. Could you give us a hypothetical example or two of "one kind of animal chanding to another kind of animal"? The reason why I ask is that many Creationists want something like an iguana hatching a clutch of puppies which actually would falsify evolution of observed.