Why are there still apes?

Tone said:

So, which is truer?

Click to expand...

How could one be truer? They're not even about the same things. They cannot be compared.

Which is truer: Indian cuisine or geometry?

Tinker Grey said:

How could one be truer? They're not even about the same things. They cannot be compared.

Click to expand...

Well, I think there is a bit of an intersection between the two, otherwise why would so many react?

I believe it may lie in the observation that, if ToE is truer, then it pretty much rules out humans being created.

*At, least by the One in the Bible.

doubtingmerle said:

They were essentially the same as us.

Click to expand...

No, they were the same as us -- not "essentially" the same as us.

That's like saying someone who has poison ivy is "essentially the same as us."

He is us. He just has poison ivy, that's all.

doubtingmerle said:

And why is it, that when I look at the fossil record arranged in order of the date of the find, I find increasing varieties of life?

Click to expand...

You and your fossils, Merle!

Is that all you think about?

Luke 19:37 And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen;
38 Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
39 And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.
40 And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

Do your fossils cry out, "Jesus is King!"

Or do they cry out, "Look at me! I'm a transitional between this and that!"

doubtingmerle said:

...in the fossil record.

Click to expand...

LOL ...

A man and his fossils.

AV1611VET said:

Ya ... that's why He documented what He did, when He did it, how He did it, what order He did it in, how long it took Him to do it, why it took Him that long, and who the eyewitnesses were.

Then preserved that documentation through all ages for mankind to read.

Click to expand...

Strathos said:

This is the same attitude flat earthers have -

Click to expand...

That God documented what He did, when He did it, how He did it, what order He did it in, how long it took Him to do it, why it took Him that long, and who the eyewitnesses were?

Strathos said:

- the earth can't be round because their interpretation of scripture says it's not, regardless of all of the physical evidence present in the world actually created by God.

Click to expand...

Oh -- if you say so.

Tone said:

Well gee, if you replace "science" with "life" in the first sentence, you could be writing about the Bible, specifically, the Gospel.

Click to expand...

But I didn't replace "science" with "life" and I wasn't writing about the Gospel.

As the old saying has it, "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride" - but they're not and they don't.

Tone said:

So, which is truer?

Click to expand...

Nonsensical question.

AV1611VET said:

That God documented what He did, when He did it, how He did it, what order He did it in, how long it took Him to do it, why it took Him that long, and who the eyewitnesses were?Oh -- if you say so.

Click to expand...

The Bible never says that the natural world is all a deception like you're suggesting. In fact, it states quite the opposite:

Psalms 19:1 said:

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

Click to expand...

What do we see when we examine the stars? A cosmos billions of years old, continuously expanding. Therefore, that's what God made and how He made it. In order to believe in your 'embedded age' idea, you would have to assume this verse to be false.

To quote one of your favorite phrases: "The Bible says it, that settles it."

Tone said:

So, which is truer?

Click to expand...

I think he's clearly indicating that he thinks both are true. That's why he referred to the choice between evolution and the gospels as a false dichotomy. Both could be true, or neither. I used to think it was both, but no longer think the gospels are true.

Hans Blaster said:

I think he's clearly indicating that he thinks both are true. That's why he referred to the choice between evolution and the gospels as a false dichotomy. Both could be true, or neither. I used to think it was both, but no longer think the gospels are true.

Click to expand...

Hmmmm, do you think maybe there's a connection there?

Strathos said:

Nonsensical question.

Click to expand...

Not even a bit.

Tone said:

Hmmmm, do you think maybe there's a connection there?

Click to expand...

What that I don't think the gospels are true and that I am no longer a Christian. Yeah, of course there is. Not believing the Gospels is the primary cause of not being a Christian.

Hans Blaster said:

What that I don't think the gospels are true and that I am no longer a Christian. Yeah, of course there is. Not believing the Gospels is the primary cause of not being a Christian.

Click to expand...

I was speaking about how the ToE gradually became more weighty in your mind, rather than the Gospel.

Tone said:

Not even a bit.

Click to expand...

It is from my perspective.

Tone said:

I was speaking about how the ToE gradually became more weighty in your mind, rather than the Gospel.

Click to expand...

OK. There's 2 problems here.

1. The gospel of Jesus isn't about creationism and the ToE certainly doesn't argue against it. (Now, I know you're going to dig out that one verse where JEsus refernece Genesis 1&2 as if it were true.)

2. Millions upon millions of Christians live long lives without their acceptance of the Theory of Evolution dragging them out of Christianity. I might have been one of them if I hadn't stopped finding the Gospels believable. (The actual thing in the false dichotomy with the ToE in previous posts to which I was responding.)

Hans Blaster said:

OK. There's 2 problems here.

1. The gospel of Jesus isn't about creationism and the ToE certainly doesn't argue against it. (Now, I know you're going to dig out that one verse where JEsus refernece Genesis 1&2 as if it were true.)

2. Millions upon millions of Christians live long lives without their acceptance of the Theory of Evolution dragging them out of Christianity. I might have been one of them if I hadn't stopped finding the Gospels believable. (The actual thing in the false dichotomy with the ToE in previous posts to which I was responding.)

Click to expand...

The Gospel is about the Seed of the woman trampling the seed of the serpent.

Did you stop finding the Gospels believable because you looked at it from the ToE lens?

Some Christians may not have a thorough grasp of implications. Plus, there is a difference between Christianity and the Bible's message.

Yeah the Gospel is way before creationism, but not before the creation.

Tone said:

The Gospel is about the Seed of the woman trampling the seed of the serpent.

Did you stop finding the Gospels believable because you looked at it from the ToE lens?

Some Christians may not have a thorough grasp of implications. Plus, there is a difference between Christianity and the Bible's message.

Yeah the Gospel is way before creationism, but not before the creation.

Click to expand...

Good grief. This is the weirdest description of the Gospel I've ever heard.

I've already said that my positions on the ToE and the Gospels were not connected. Why do you keep refusing to see this. It's a simple claim that doesn't require any analysis. Just a simple claim I made about myself.

Diff between Christianity and the Bible. Yeah. I know this. It's not like I ever read the bible at all. At least beyond the weeks readings.

How do I know I didn't view the Gospel from a "ToE view"? That's easy-- I didn't think about evolution in church or the gospels outside church.