Qwertyui0p
Active Member
- Dec 20, 2019
- 266
- 71
- 41
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Upvote
0
What creationists need to do to win against evolution.
- Thread starter pitabread
- Start date
Qwertyui0p
Active Member
- Dec 20, 2019
- 266
- 71
- 41
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Upvote
0
Subduction Zone
Regular Member
Your link is to a list of PRATT's. Ideas refuted a long time ago. From a dishonest site where one has to swear not to use the scientific method.
If you ask "Such as" you tell us that you do not understand the concept of evidence. For example the entire fossil record is evidence for evolution. All creationist attempts to explain it fail.
Here is just one small piece of evidence. The hips of the Australopithecus africanus are closer to human hips than to any other ape. Yet creationists improperly try to say that she was "just an ape". They are somewhat right since they "just apes" as well:
Upvote
0
Subduction Zone
Regular Member
Why would you use that site? It is worthless. They removed themselves from scientific debate by ordering their workers not to use the scientific method.
Upvote
0
Lee Stuvmen
If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature:
- Jul 27, 2013
- 192
- 38
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Sure!
This is a major component of the information you said was refuted long ago. If you could quote your sources as I have, I would more than be willing to consider them.
Remember, we are trying to prove there is no creation. Remember, we are trying to prove that the Bible is 100% hogwash. Right?
Ready?
Can you find the error in this;
History testifies;
- King Nebuchadnezzar was the king of ancient Babylon.
-king of Babylon c. 605 BC – c. 562 BC, was the longest-reigning and most powerful monarch of the Neo-Babylonian Empire.
- Babylon was conquered by the Medes and Persians
-In 539 BC, the Neo-Babylonian Empire fell to Cyrus the Great, king of Persia, with a military engagement known as the Battle of Opis.
- Alexander and Greece conquered the Persians
-Alexander the Great (Alexander III of Macedon) defeated the Persian armies at Granicus (334 BC)
On either 10 or 11 June 323 BC, Alexander died in the palace of Nebuchadnezzar II, in Babylon, at age 32
- Four Kingdoms rose up out of Alexander's Greece after his death
After the assassination of Perdiccas in 321 BC, Macedonian unity collapsed, and 40 years of war between "The Successors" (Diadochi) ensued before the Hellenistic world settled into four stable power blocs:
the Ptolemaic Kingdom,
the Seleucid Empire,
Kingdom of Pergamon, and
Kingdom of Macedon.
The KJV Bible testifies;
- Daniel 2 names King Nebuchadnezzar as the FIRST of FOUR World Superpower Nations.
- Daniel 5 testifies the Medes and Persian's conquered Babylon
-28 Peres; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.
- Daniel 8 names Persia BY NAME as the SECOND of the FOUR World Superpower Nations.
-20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
- Daniel 8 names Alexander and Greece BY NAME as the THIRD of the FOUR World Superpower Nations.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
Isn't that the story we just read?
One story was history
One story was prophecy(history written before it happened)
Brother, your opinion would have meant so much more had you had actually viewed the information before commenting on them.
Now wouldn't it be something if that story continued on in just the same manner to this very point in time?
Makes Steven King look illiterate
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Subduction Zone
Regular Member
Sorry your entire post is a strawman argument. No one has claimed that the Bible is one hundred percent hogwash. By the way that is a dishonest way of debating that as a Christian you should be ashamed of. You are trying to claim that your opponents said something that they did not say
You failed. Can you make a proper arugment?
Upvote
0
Lee Stuvmen
If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature:
- Jul 27, 2013
- 192
- 38
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Subduction Zone
Regular Member
Really? Then why did you quote my post? Why did you argue against claims that no one, not even the most ardent atheist is saying?
You failed. Why did you post that way?
You also demonstrated a lack of understanding of the book of Daniel. It is not prophetic. It is historic. It was written much later than you probably think that it was and not by Daniel.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Lee Stuvmen
If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature:
- Jul 27, 2013
- 192
- 38
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
About this time tomorrow, you will have your answer, but not by me.
Upvote
0
Subduction Zone
Regular Member
We could discuss some of the errors in your post while you wait.
Upvote
0
Speedwell
Well-Known Member
- May 11, 2016
- 23,928
- 17,625
- 81
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Other Religion
- Marital Status
- Married
The Book of Daniel was composed about the middle of the 2nd century BC, just before the death of Antiochus, which Daniel's "prophecy" gets wrong. It's not the Bible which is "hogwash," but your interpretation is highly questionable.
Upvote
0
Subduction Zone
Regular Member
I don't think that he wants to know this. But I could be wrong.
Upvote
0
The above showed up when I opened to this thread.
WHY would Krauss say that?
What's wrong with there being a God?
If you posted it, you must agree.
(maybe not).
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Thanks Pitabread.
Also, there are fish that live deep in the ocean that really cannot see because it's totally dark down there and eyes for vision are not necessary since they wouldn't be able to see anything anyway.
Just a thought:
I'm not totally opposed to evolution...
but you seem to be totally opposed to a God....
is this true?
Maybe science is too closed-minded and this is hindering further knowledge in some way?
Upvote
0
Right.
IOW,,,the existence of aliens would NOT answer the question of how life got started or how God got started. (of course, I believe God ALWAYS existed).
I won't go back to check...but I believe I said that each culture DOES see God in a different way.
What I said is that they are all worshipping the same God...THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD. HOW one wishes to worship Him does depend on that particular culture.
God can be called by different names...but it's still only one God.
For instance, the persons of the O.T. lived about 4,000 years ago. Somehow God revealed Himself to the patriarchs, much in the same way as He reveals Himself to persons today... From that time forward they believed that everything that happened was caused by God. This cannot be true or He would be a God of confusion --- but mixed in with this is the fact that He DID cause much to happen...for instance, the Exile of the Israelites from Egypt...I do believe God had a hand in that. IOW, somehow or other God will bring to pass what He wishes to happen.
As to your list of gods...
the God of the Sun
etc.
Primitive persons saw God in everything and gave God different names....in theology we understand that there is only ONE GOD,,,seen in many ways.
OR,,,,you could think of it as the above stated by you.
But don't you find it interesting that every culture has believed in some type of god...even cultures far away from each other (in distance)?
Upvote
0
I can agree that we are animals and not plants.
In the broad sense of the word, I agree.
I don't care for the fact that children are taught that they are like an ape --- this is what children take away from being told that we come from apes.
Been through this discussion on this thread....
You know the story.
Upvote
0
I think I mis-spoke of that's what you understood about there not being a first cause.
I'll try to be more careful:
If the universe was caused by something...
then that something could not have had a cause,,,it was uncaused...God is uncaused.
If God was caused...then THAT CAUSE would have had to have no cause.
Somehow what CAUSED EVERYTHING could not have itself had a cause.
What would be a 3rd choice?
Mine were:
1. God created everything.
2. The universe came from nothing.
As to your logical reasoning that if God could come from nothing, then the universe could also come from nothing...
Your comment does not correspond to the understanding of what GOD is. God has no cause and has always existed. This can be believed or not...but cannot be explained.
We are still searching for HOW the BB happened and HOW life began (not evolved).
It's not semantic pedantry FB....
In theology, God is NOT part of everything He made.
God is OUTSIDE of His creation.
The watchmaker is not part of the watch, but is outside of it.
What I was saying is that some religions see God in everything...this is pantheism. It is not understood as the God that is almighty, sovereign and is accepted by different religions. In a sense God IS in everything, but this is a nuance that cannot be discussed with a non-believer.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Similar threads
