Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
This thread is 6 years old... Tell me how this is not trolling.
Is this the one?
No? I have no idea who that is.
Personally, I just think AV gets bored with current topics and likes to necro old threads simply because he knows it gets a rise out of people.
Your memory is better than mine!Didn't he call you an old geezer or something like that?
Your memory is better than mine!
.
Why the KJV only?Believers should doubt fallible men of their fallible devices in science in regards to the evolution theory and trust in God & His words in the KJV.
How did any of the people you mentioned use their belief in a creator God to further their work?Well I was throwing in a bit of a joke with the smiling moon. But I am detecting some ridicule there which is uncalled for. The assumption that if a person chooses to believe therefore hasn't got a brain or uses it is unfair and quite harsh. Some of the greatest scientist are Christians and some of the greatest people who have given us some great scientific break throughs are also christians and believe in a creator God. IE
Nicholas Copernicus , Galileo Galilei, Isaac Newton, Gregor Mendel, Albert Einstein, Francis Bacon, Ernst Haeckel, Louis Pasteur, Johannes Kepler, Max Plank.
I examined creation and came to the conclusion that it's virtually impossible for creation to exist without a creator.
Why the KJV only?
That is indeed biblicalYou are merely asserting this is a "creation," which of course entails are "creator." This is called "begging the question."
Please explain how bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics...?
Please explain how bacteria developed the ability to digest nylon..?
Please explain how E. coli developed the ability to digest citrase...?
It's still a bacteria, right? It doesn't prove macro evolution or even hint at it.
Why the KJV only?
Get back in line. Now that's a good boy.I have found that the Received Texts or the Textus Receptus which originated from Antioch as the source is more reliable than those source documents originating from Alexandria were poetic licensing & gnostism is known to have existed.
Acts 11:26And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch
Secular history reports how plagiarized literatures has been done in Alexandria to verify poetic licensing as well as gnosticism being in the area.
Jesus had testified that the Father said that those that did not love Jesus nor His words would not keep His saying and those that did love His words would.
John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
Jesus prophesied that just as He was persecuted, so will they persecute His disciples by not keeping their sayings as well.
John 15:20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.
Alot of omissions have been done to the testimony of the deity of Christ in the NIV. One can still find it in the NIV, but in comparison, it should be telltaling about the source documents at Alexandria was indeed subjected to poetic licensing and gnosticism. They changed it enough to suit their needs as the leaders will use those changed references to support their false teachings in denying the deity of Christ to steer followers away from the word of God in seeking secret knowledge which one can suspect praying & fasting was a means to obtain it by. I do digress....
False teachings abounds and apostasy is across all the denomenational churches wherein hopefully a few are still keeping to the faith, but I am not holding my breath since no church wants to examine themselves in the faith: prove all church traditions by the scripture via reformation..
Amos 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord: 12 And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it. 13 In that day shall the fair virgins and young men faint for thirst.
So if there be any doubt as to the meaning of His words, go before that throne of grace and trust Jesus as your Good Shepherd to give you wisdom in understanding His words as they are kept in the KJV.
James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. 13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do. 14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. 15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.
1 Peter 2:25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
It's still a bacteria, right? It doesn't prove macro evolution or even hint at it.
That's like explaining how some of us can develop an immunity. It was in our system to be able to resist. Those with developed immunity are no more an X-Man than anyone else that did not developed an immunity is a homo inferior. Man is still a man and a bacteria is still a bacteria.
Adaptation. Like man adapting to his environment. Just because it is not generally known, it does not mean it never had that means to do so.
Please note: again it does not prove nor hint at macro evolution because it is still a bacteria.
Who said it never had that ability? And yet the E coli has not evolved into anything else other than an E coli.
First, get it out of your head that there is some distinction between micro evolution and macro evolution. There is just evolution. Micro and macro are only terms we use to define scale. The difference between micro evolution and macro evolution is the same as microscopic and macroscopic. You can't accept microscopic things and deny the existence of macroscopic things.
Second, bacteria will always be bacteria. Humans will always be humans. Whatever bacteria or humans evolve into will simply be a subset of bacteria and humans.
For example, the reason why we say humans and chimpanzees are both apes is because we both evolved from a common ape ancestor. And yes, even the birds you see today are still technically dinosaurs.
Lastly, the idea that "macroevolution" says that a species should evolve into some other laterally classified species is a strawman made up by creationists out of a misunderstanding of the Theory of Evolution.
Macroevolution refers to evolution of groups larger than an individual species.
Those who aren't vehemently opposed to science and are at least willing to accept a basic education in biology understand this.
The middle of the Cambrian Period began with an extinction event. Many of the reef-building organisms died out, as well as the most primitive trilobites. One hypothesis suggests that this was due to a temporary depletion of oxygen caused by an upwelling of cooler water from deep ocean areas. This upwelling eventually resulted in a variety of marine environments ranging from the deep ocean to the shallow coastal zones. Scientists hypothesize that this increase in available ecological niches set the stage for the abrupt radiation in life forms commonly called the Cambrian Explosion.
''For example,'' Dr. Novacek said, ''we found the oyster beds and sand dollars just beneath the lowest sediments containing land animals. At that point the water was shallow and receding rapidly - a time of transition from sea to land, as the land was thrust up by magma and the movement of tectonic plates.'' In more recent sediments, the group found species related to modern rodents, porcupines, rhinoceroses and camels. Among the many fossil curiosities they came across were ungulates (including a rabbit-like ungulate), marsupials and giant sloths.
Owing to the incompleteness of our understanding of the fossil record, mass extinctions are harder to pin down than it might seem, and the task becomes more difficult the farther one goes back in time. Very ancient rocks are poorly represented today, so we cannot say with surety than a given assemblage went extinct within a geologically short interval or not; the critical horizon may simply not be available for sampling.
So it is not presently known for sure how many mass extinctions have occurred throughout the history of life on earth, and different authors offer varied interpretations. There is good evidence available for most of Phanerozoic, however, and nearly every recent publication will list the following events as being of the greatest severity:
"Impotent" You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. You might consider looking it up.Example of this in cross breeding of species: the lion & tiger are close in relations and science cross breeded them together and got a liger, both make & female: BUT in spite of the fact that they normally do not breed together naturally, they are both impotent.
Now imagine cross breeding happening by chance? The horse & mule breeding are still overlooking the fact that the offspring is impotent
Oh my, are you trying to set a record for the most erroneous facts in a single post? You are doing a good job but those before you have left a legacy of some very standards for this so you may have a ways to go.
So far my favorite is:
"Impotent" You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. You might consider looking it up.
Dizredux
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?