A Pondering of the Peculiar (3)

[Davian]

Sorry, I wasn't trying to avoid your question... let me flip the Bible open and I will tell you what He says or better yet, why don't you try it? It would be more realistic if you felt the love first hand.

So you are insincere in your cosmology questions. I was hoping for some intellectual honesty, after our initial exchange.

 

[Davian]

No you are not the ones claiming to talk to God, nor shall I talk to Him for you. How about you go ask Darwin and see if one of his talking monkeys will help you... oh wait only a few monkeys a long time ago learned to speak so there are no monkeys to ask... mmm you are in a quandrum eh?

And if we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

Keep 'em coming....

 

[BrotherRickG]

How familiar with CMBR are you?

The problem of cosmic microwave background evidence is that we are left with the interpretation of the radiation from others and it is not something we can test ourselves. It is like having the Bible written only in Latin and relying on the interpretation of its words from people. And we already know that people are not to be trusted. Most are agenda driven and the money is in evolution not Creation. If only a 10th of the funds spent on evolution were given to the science of Creation we would be having a much different debate. Plus, what is the standard. How much static or noise was there, what is the depletion rate do to refraction, space wind or turbulence, gravity, etc... Too many variables to even be close to any real truth don't you think.

Case in point, man made global warming or climate change and not a cyclical event of sun spot and radiant energy that comes around every so many years. There is more money in man made global warming and it is used as the standard when it is really the false teaching.

 

[Davian]

Two ways of looking at it. One way is setting off a stick of dynamite and the dynamite represents the beginning. You see the sparks and flames fly away from the explosion. If you were to measure the distance of how far the sparks flew wouldn't you start where the dynamite was not where the sparks landed. That is the variable that is omitted. How fast did the sparks fly away? We know where they landed. The light started from the center and went outward therefore the measurement has to be from here to there not there to here.

The other way to look at it is to hold a flashlight and turn it on and throw it. How fast was it thrown would be the measurement for the light was already on.

When we hear teachers of evolution, one way they will teach the age of the universe by the distance of the stars as if they were dark until they got to their resting spot and that is not true. They were already glowing and got dispersed by the explosion or better yet, the Creation of the universe as we know it. So they must allow for the speed of dispersement which would dramatically reduce their age.

Your analogy is too faulty to bother with.

You are (falsely) equating the standard model of cosmology and the theory of evolution with atheism.

Perhaps you should read the works of Francis Collins, evangelical Christian, and American physician-geneticist:

"Collins uncritically accepts and summarizes the standard big bang story (pp. 71–78),7 then discusses the Anthropic Principle"

Harmony and discord: A review of Francis Collins' book The Language of God

"As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before.

It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming.

I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that."

Scientist Francis Collins on evolution science faith religion genome gene language of God - Beliefnet.com

 

[GenemZ]

Exactly. The bible is replete with errors like this that leave no doubt that the bible is nothing more than a collection of anecdotes and cultural myths written by men with available knowledge of the time.

The copyist error is not what appeared in the original text. If it did? Then the Word of God would be fallible.

 

[HitchSlap]

The copyist error is not what appeared in the original text. If it did? Then the Word of God would be fallible.

Do you even read what you type? If it were the "Word of God," THERE WOULD BE NO ERRORS. Get it?

Otherwise, all were left with is just your word that it's the "Word of God."

See the difference?

 

[bhsmte]

The copyist error is not what appeared in the original text. If it did? Then the Word of God would be fallible.

The originals are lost, so no one knows what was in the originals.

 

[GenemZ]

And if we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

Keep 'em coming....

The real question should be... why is there still man?

Man was quite a leap from a monkey. Missing links should be plentiful and found everywhere. Even the birds that Darwin observed had lived in abundance right before the famous transformation took place. Why so few missing links?

 

[HitchSlap]

Missing links should be plentiful and found everywhere.

They, are. What makes you think they're not?

 

[GenemZ]

They, are. What makes you think they're not?

The fact that you are not offering a plethora of examples. You just things that sound convenient and don't care to be bothered.

 

[PsychoSarah]

The fact that you are not offering a plethora of examples. You just things that sound convenient and don't care to be bothered.

There are dozens, most with very long names. Do you really want the list?

 

[HitchSlap]

The fact that you are not offering a plethora of examples. You just things that sound convenient and don't care to be bothered.

If I did offer a plethora, would it sway you?

 

[BrotherRickG]

Your analogy is too faulty to bother with.

You are (falsely) equating the standard model of cosmology and the theory of evolution with atheism.

Perhaps you should read the works of Francis Collins, evangelical Christian, and American physician-geneticist:

As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before.

It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming.

I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that.

Your scientific studies are cool I bet. But it does not disprove but prove the Bible and Creation. God tells us that all was created from the dirt and walla, everything is high in carbon and the consistency is very close. But the creation of each individual DNA is just different enough to give each living thing its own profile. Remember that you cannot create harmony from chaos. It just doesn't work that way. Harmony begets harmony and chaos begets chaos.

As for the dynamite analogy, what is wrong with it? Is it too simple for your highly educated mind? The standards are what are in question. The standards were built on guesses not fact, then everything was built up from there.

And as the comparison of evolutionists with Atheist. Name one Atheist that believes in Creation...

The battle for the mind has never been so bold as it is now. Look who the administration has put in charge of teaching the military religious tolerance:

Taking God Out Of The US Military, Atheist Michael "Mikey" Weinstein

He is a very evil man...

 

[Mr Clean]

I like baseball...

 

[PsychoSarah]

Your scientific studies are cool I bet. But it does not disprove but prove the Bible and Creation. God tells us that all was created from the dirt and walla, everything is high in carbon and the consistency is very close. But the creation of each individual DNA is just different enough to give each living thing its own profile. Remember that you cannot create harmony from chaos. It just doesn't work that way. Harmony begets harmony and chaos begets chaos.

As for the dynamite analogy, what is wrong with it? Is it too simple for your highly educated mind? The standards are what are in question. The standards were built on guesses not fact, then everything was built up from there.

And as the comparison of evolutionists with Atheist. Name one Atheist that believes in Creation..

Well, I know atheists (who I like to make fun of) who believe aliens put life on earth, sort of like creation I suppose.

We live in a world of chaos, so I do not know of this harmony of which you speak. The universe is hardly fine tuned for life, it is much better at killing us than supporting us, even in terms of our own planet.

 

[PsychoSarah]

We didn't evolve from monkeys. Humans and monkeys evolved from a common ancestor.

He knows, he is making fun of stupid questions.

 

[Mr Clean]

Your scientific studies are cool I bet. But it does not disprove but prove the Bible and Creation. God tells us that all was created from the dirt and walla, everything is high in carbon and the consistency is very close. But the creation of each individual DNA is just different enough to give each living thing its own profile.

There is nothing in science that proves any religious claim. Nothing. There is zero evidence for the existence of any god at any time in human history...

Remember that you cannot create harmony from chaos. It just doesn't work that way. Harmony begets harmony and chaos begets chaos.

A leaf takes air from the atmosphere, water from the ground, and sunlight and manufacturers complex sugar molecules. You couldn't be more wrong.

 

[BrotherRickG]

Well, I know atheists (who I like to make fun of) who believe aliens put life on earth, sort of like creation I suppose.

We live in a world of chaos, so I do not know of this harmony of which you speak. The universe is hardly fine tuned for life, it is much better at killing us than supporting us, even in terms of our own planet.

Ergo, another statement to prove Creation. Life is not getting better but just the opposite. If evolution was the true foundation then it should be getting better don't you think?

Now the Bible on the other hand clearly states that civilization will get worse until it is stopped. But no one here needs to be Bible thumped, just stay with the facts.

 

[Loudmouth]

Ergo, another statement to prove Creation. Life is not getting better but just the opposite. If evolution was the true foundation then it should be getting better don't you think?

Nowhere in the theory of evolution does it say that life should be getting better.

 

[HitchSlap]

And as the comparison of evolutionists with Atheist. Name one Atheist that believes in Creation...

I can't. But I can name many Christians who accept ToE.