A question I don't think creationists will answer.

[justlookinla]

It developed from an ape ancestor species.

How did humanity come into existence. You're not answering that.

No, you're denying it. Not the same thing.

You're right, I deny the view that humanity was created by entirely, solely, completely naturalistic mechanisms acting on a life form from long long ago.

Questioning it would require that you actually provide evidence that counters it.

Not true. You make a claim, I question the claim and either agree or disagree.

 

[justlookinla]

Simple, humanity wasn't created, it evolved.

No, humanity was created to exist where it had never existed before.

And no, you are trying to play semantic games and are questioning evolution. You are not questioning any aspect of creation at all.

I don't question evolution, I question certain creationist views, i.e., Darwinist creationism.

This would be much clearer if you would use proper terminology, but then you know that. You know you would have lost long ago.

The terminology should reflect the various creationist views.

 

[justlookinla]

You are free to have your personal views. And, we are free to point out how your views are indeed; "personal" and not based on the TOE or what is says.

IMO, this has been pointed out quite well, but you can keep on if you like, as that is more a reflection on you personally, than it is on what the TOE states or does not state.

We all can keep it on, can't we? You present your views, I'll present mine and we'll all be happy?

 

[bhsmte]

We all can keep it on, can't we? You present your views, I'll present mine and we'll all be happy?

Well, at some point, the issue becomes moot, once your position and evidence to back the same has been presented countless times. Just like in a court of law, the evidence is only presented a limited amount of times and then the jury looks at it and decides.

I'm quite sure, the participants on this board have taken note and formed an opinion and I would think they have plenty of information to base a conclusion on.

Beyond that, reputations and credibility is established and folks can keep singing their tune if they so desire and we all live happily ever after.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, humanity was created to exist where it had never existed before.

Prove it, I have evidence that they evolved. Too bad that I can't show that evidence to you yet.

I don't question evolution, I question certain creationist views, i.e., Darwinist creationism.

Please, you do not get to make up your own terminology. That is a breaking of the 9th commandment. You know that this is not honest.

The terminology should reflect the various creationist views.

But we don't have creationist views. You cannot defeat the theory of evolution by playing word games. As you have been told before this is not honest. Words cannot be defined by one person only.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Subduction Zone

Simple, humanity wasn't created, it evolved.
​

No, humanity was created to exist where it had never existed before.

This is getting deep.........


.

 

[bhsmte]

This is getting deep.........


.

You know what they say; if the facts are not on your side, muddy the water as much as you can.

 

[RickG]

I don't question evolution, I question certain creationist views, i.e., Darwinist creationism.

The trouble is evolution has nothing to do with anything being created whether naturally or supernaturally. The made up term is an oxymoron.

 

[Subduction Zone]

This is getting deep.........


.

Sorry, justlook does not want to debate the subject. He would rather run away and play semantic games.

 

[Aman777]

Originally Posted by Subduction Zone

Simple, humanity wasn't created, it evolved.
​

Originally Posted by justlookinla

No, humanity was created to exist where it had never existed before.
​

This is getting deep.........

Dear LittleLambofJesus, Some all knowing Evols naively tell us that Humans evolved but God tells us that the LORD made man with His Own Hands. Gen 2:4-7 Wonder if the Godless Evols want Christians to actually believe them INSTEAD of God? Since they have everything else wrong, I suppose they do. God Bless you, and thank you for your service in fighting the evil and darkness of this world.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please, evidence please. Isn't it sacrilege to misuse the Bible? Too bad you can't be reported for that.

 

[bhsmte]

Originally Posted by Subduction Zone

Simple, humanity wasn't created, it evolved.
​

Originally Posted by justlookinla

No, humanity was created to exist where it had never existed before.
​

Dear LittleLambofJesus, Some all knowing Evols naively tell us that Humans evolved but God tells us that the LORD made man with His Own Hands. Gen 2:4-7 Wonder if the Godless Evols want Christians to actually believe them INSTEAD of God? Since they have everything else wrong, I suppose they do. God Bless you, and thank you for your service in fighting the evil and darkness of this world.

In Love,
Aman

You need to add something at the end:

I'm Aman and I approve of this message.

 

[Aman777]

Please, evidence please. Isn't it sacrilege to misuse the Bible? Too bad you can't be reported for that.

Dear SZ, Evols cannot understand evidence unless it agrees with their False Theory of Evolism. They have eyes which cannot see and ears which cannot hear. I really feel sorry for them and their certain future. God Bless you, and help you to see His Truth.

In Love,
Aman

 

[PsychoSarah]

Dear SZ, Evols cannot understand evidence unless it agrees with their False Theory of Evolism. They have eyes which cannot see and ears which cannot hear. I really feel sorry for them and their certain future. God Bless you, and help you to see His Truth.

In Love,
Aman

Do you honestly think people are so limited no one is capable of at least understanding arguments which don't agree with their views, even if they don't agree with those arguments?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Dear SZ, Evols cannot understand evidence unless it agrees with their False Theory of Evolism. They have eyes which cannot see and ears which cannot hear. I really feel sorry for them and their certain future. God Bless you, and help you to see His Truth.

In Love,
Aman

Again, no. You do not understand evidence. There is undeniable evidence for evolution and evolution only. Please watch your language.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Doesn't matter how special I think humanity is, humanity didn't exist at one time, now it does. It was created somehow, somewhere, at some time. The issue is creationism.

And the way Homo Sapiens came to be is explained in evolutionary biology: by gradual evolution through descend with modification followed by natural selection. Which is supported by many, many independent lines of evidence and contradicted by none.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Dear LittleLambofJesus, Some all knowing Evols naively tell us that Humans evolved but God tells us that the LORD made man with His Own Hands.

"god" doesn't tell you anything. You have a book written by humans which makes a bunch of claims and you assert those claims to reflect truth. Just like muslims do with the quran, or hindu's with the bagavad ghita, or <insert religious follower> with <insert religious book>.

Now, if you are going to tell me that this god is actually speaking to you - as in you actually HEAR a voice - I can only recommend that you might want to go talk to a shrink or something.

Wonder if the Godless Evols want Christians to actually believe them INSTEAD of God?

"godless" people like me don't actually care at all if you believe in unsupportable, undefendable things.

However, I would prefer that people are rational in their acceptance of the phenomena of reality.

To deny evolutionary processes and evolutionary history in this day and age is as "out there" as it would be to deny that the earth is a sphere or that the earth orbits the sun.

The thing is about creationists is that their ONLY reason to deny scientific theories are their a priori religious beliefs.

You never find an atheist who thinks the evidence suggests the earth is young.
You never find an atheist who thinks the evidence suggest that the world was completely flooded at some point.
You never find an atheists who thinks humans (or indeed any other living system) doesn't fit on the tree of life like a glove in context of evolutionary history.

No, such ideas (young earth, no evolution, floods, etc) are completely restricted to a single religion. And not even the entire religion, but specific subsets thereof.

By and far the largest christian denomination (catholics) don't accept such views at all.

So really, without your beliefs you are a minority within a minority that can be shown to only hold the beliefs you do because of your a priori religious beliefs, which are by definition faith-based.

Because of this, I'm sorry to say, your objections to any field, theory or law of science are 100% irrelevant. We can most likely discard them at face value.

 

[DerelictJunction]

Yes I did. The creation concepts are very well presented in the Darwinist view of how humanity was created.

I vacillate between questioning your honesty or your ability to comprehend simple sentences. It is obvious to anyone who can read that creationism is not represented in the definition for Darwinism. Case closed.

There is no other impetus allowed or presented other than the naturalistic impetus for all of life we observe today. The view that naturalistic processes alone, completely, totally, solely, only are needed to create humanity is at the very core of the inherently atheistic Darwinist creationist view. I can find no other impetus allowed, permitted or considered other than the inherently atheistic Darwinist creationist view. If you know of any, I'd certainly be interested in seeing them.

Another reading comprehension problem. You claim that they are being taught that there is not God behind evolution. I asked you to provide evidence in the form of an approved lesson plan or a textbook. You, of course, simply reiterated your baseless assumption and then shifted the burden of proof to me. I can tell you that it is extremely unlikely that a god is mentioned in lessons on evolution, either as helping or not existing. To support my contention, I would have to provide you with every lesson plan and every textbook used in science classes all over our country. To support your contention, all you have to do is provide one lesson plan or one textbook. You can't do that then your assertion is not worth the pixels we're using to read it.

Nope, it's the truth. Science has not found evidence that humanity is totally, completely, solely, totally the creation of naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago. Post it, if you think it has. Remember, don't respond with your typical common descent evasion, remember the issue is about what, or who, created humanity where humanity did not exist before.

Evidence for common descent is also evidence for common descent without the intervention of an outside entity.
It's just not proof that the outside entity was absent. You seem to be asking for proof. However, most of us here have conceded that our lack of belief in an outside entity starting or guiding common descent is simply our belief and not a guarantee that the entity is missing. You're spinning your wheels here.

Yes they are. Humanity did not exist at a point in time, now it exists. This existence of humanity is only explained by the naturalistic mechanisms creating humanity from a single life form of long long ago according to the Darwinist creationism model being presented in schools.

Find a definition of creationism that does not mention the divine or a god. Then you might have a leg to stand on. They are being taught that humanity developed from an ancestor ape species via evolution. Gods are not mentioned as being present or being absent. So, it's not creationism.

Sure it's a creationist viewpoint. An inherently atheistic viewpoint.

It can't be both. Learn the definitions used in this controversy and you will end the conjecture that you are either a dishonest or not too bright.

Exactly. The mention is that the only explanation, the only impetus needed to create humanity, is that you, children, are the result of entirely naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago. And then they're taught the error that there is evidence for the creationist view.

The only reason I am writing this again is for anyone reading to see your misrepresentation clearly. Here goes.
Teaching only the mechanics and evidence for evolution and common descent, which is what we have evidence for, is not the same thing as teaching there was no outside entity that caused evolution or guided common descent. In the same way, teaching the only mechanics of molecule building and destruction in chemistry is not the same thing as teaching that there was no outside entity that caused atoms to exist or built the laws behind chemical combining. There is no scientific evidence supporting the hypothesis that there is no entity is behind these things so it doesn't get taught. There is also no scientific evidence supporting the hypothesis that there is an entity behind these things so that doesn't get taught either.

Depends on one's view of creation and evolution. I accept evolution. I don't accept the inherently atheistic viewpoint of Darwinist creationism.

Then you don't accept the view that there was a divine act of creation that ensured the development of modern species through mutation and natural selection? That's my definition for "Darwinist creationism" and until some official definition is provided, when I see that phase, I will comprehend it by my definition. BTW, I take issue with your associating atheism with Darwinist creationism.

Nothing. Why replace it with anything?

So you don't have a problem with what is being taught in school? Why are you complaining then?

They are taught that all of the variety and complexity of life we observe today is the result, totally, completely, only, solely by naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago. I've pointed this out probabaly a hundred times now. The message is clear, God isn't needed or allowed or permitted or accepted in the creation of the complex and varied life forms we observe today. It's an inherently atheistic viewpoint of creation.

Just like chemistry and auto mechanics.

Ignoring your continual mockery, the fact remains, not a single shred of evidence is given that only naturalistic mechanisms created all the complex and varied life forms we observe today.

Not true...you know it...so, it's a lie.

Right, your behavior is my fault, not yours. I understand.

No..no. It is my fault. When faced with behavior like yours, I tend to choose the lower road after a bit. You recall that I was decent to you for quite a while, but you kept up the trolling behavior. I just wanted others to know that this was about you as an individual not your claimed religion or your unstated belief regarding evolution.

Two words. Darwinist creationism.

You mean:
The belief that living organisms originate from the specific act of divine creation which was the ensuring that all species of organisms arise and develop through natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individuals ability to compete, survive and reproduce.

You will continue to see those. Unless you ignore me, of course.

I don't mind. I don't ignore people, that's reserved for cowards. If I lose a debate...I lose. No skin off my back and I may learn something....even from you.

 

[DerelictJunction]

How did humanity come into existence. You're not answering that.

Yes, it developed from ancestor species that stretch all the way back to the first life form. That life form came into existence somehow. What caused that? I think it was the processes of chemistry.

You're right, I deny the view that humanity was created by entirely, solely, completely naturalistic mechanisms acting on a life form from long long ago.

Ok...evidence?

Not true. You make a claim, I question the claim and either agree or disagree.

So, most of your conversations go like this:
You: I believe that the rapture occurs before the 7 year tribulation.
Him: I believe that the rapture occurs when the beast defiles the new temple.
You: I question your claim...goodbye.

If that is how it works, then why are you still here? You could have finished up on your first post.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Again, no. You do not understand evidence. There is undeniable evidence for evolution and evolution only. Please watch your language.

What do you mean by undeniable evidence for evolution and evolution only?