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.
The Bible makes lots of claims. For example we read in 2Timothy3:13 "evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived."You make a lot of claims
Not at all. The Bible claims that the wages of sin is death. God does not in anyway encourage people to sin. In fact He encourages us to choose life, health, blessings and prosperity. Still people have free will and they can choose death, sickness, poverty and the curse if that is the choice they want to make. Death is actually the easy choice and that is why so many people are going to perish. Life is the more difficult way. For example if you want good health you have to eat right, exercise and learn how to control your stress. Not everyone wants to take good care of themselves so they can be healthy. Still that is a choice we can all make. Just like if people want to prosper that may involve hard work and getting a good education. For some people that is more effort then it is worth. 2/3 of the people in american choose NOT to get a college education.It also claims that slaughtering fetuses is OK. Hosea 13:16.
I really do not know what you are talking about. You seem to love to quote people out of context. Or twist their words.Why employ bible verses after you've boasted of extreme understanding of evolution via a biology degree?
Sort of undercuts your whole argument.
Again you twist peoples words to try and come up with a straw-man argument. Paley lived in the 1700's, he died in 1805. Darwin published his book in 1859. Clearly Paley and his argument came first. Darwin's grandfather Erasmus Darwin, was alive at the time of Paley and he was the one to actually argue with Paley himself. Charles just added to his grandfathers argument. A argument that promotes a godless agenda that has been around for a very long time going back to the Greeks. A discussion that we see with Paul in the Bible. Paul use to go to Mars Hill when he was in Athens so that he could preach his sermon and present his beliefs.I thought you said you knew all about evolution, yet here you are claiming that Darwin came up with evolution to counter Paley.
I call foul!
No one argues with 101 evolution, and it can be well supported in a court of law. The problem is the conclusions they try to draw from the known evidence. They take truth and error and mix them together. They try to use evidence for micro evolution and apply it to macro evolution and this is little more then a bait and switch attempt to mislead people. Perhaps the real problem is if you want to try to deal with the lies and the deception or the false science then you have to do some research and know a little bit of what you are talking about and for most people that is simply more trouble then what it is worth and they do not have time to mess around with it. I had a friend with a Phd in Biological science. He really did not support evolutionary theory but he was to busy to argue with anyone about it and he did not want to get into the debate or the discussion.Actually, 'Darwinism', as such, was based on a great deal of evidence.
When it was merged with population genetics, even MORE evidence supported the basic premises of evolution.
The problem with people like you is that you equate perusing some creationist websites, in conjunction with your supposed biology degree, with actual knowledge.
Science goes through constant revision and change and they are far to quick to try to defend beliefs that simply do not end up surviving the test of time.
Perhaps the real problem is if you want to try to deal with the lies and the deception or the false science
I had a friend with a Phd in Biological science. He really did not support evolutionary theory but he was to busy to argue with anyone about it and he did not want to get into the debate or the discussion.
There is no conflict between science and the Bible. The question is what does the Bible teach us and what is true science. The nice thing about science is that true science does just that and seeks to know the truth.Sure do:
The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief
p. 134
“This (genetic similarity) evidence alone does not, of course, prove a common ancestor; from a creationist perspective, such similarities could simply demonstrate that God used successful design principles over and over again. As we shall see, however, and as was foreshadowed above by the discussion of ‘silent’ mutations in protein-coding regions, the detailed study of genomes has rendered that interpretation virtually untenable–not only about all other living things, but also about ourselves.”
The point is YOU claim that Darwin invented evolution and he did not. It was around long before Darwin. His only contribution was the theory of natural selection. As you well know evolution today is made up of many theory well beyond natural selection. Some of them accepted and some of them are not very well selected.Here is what you wrote:
"...Paley came before Darwin and Darwin was trying to come up with an argument against Paley "
Are you claiming that you did NOT write that?
What context, specifically, alters the obvious meaning of that claim that YOU MADE?
So you agree with me then that Darwin did not invent evolution. He just helped to rewrite the dictionary to come up with a new definition for the word.Perhaps you can quote me where I said that Darwin "invented evolution."
A good example is Francis Collins book "The Language of Life". He tells us that: "The discoveries of the last decade, little known to most of the public, have completely overturned much of what used to be taught in High School Biology".Such as?
The wages of sin is death. That means sin ends up in death.Utterly irrelevant.
Killing fetuses for 'sin" is heinous and sickening.
You have not demonstrated that you have anything to contribute so if you want to quit then no problem.No, and I am on the verge of no longer responding to you as you seem to have something of an honesty issue.
He felt it was a waste of his time.I wonder why?
A good example is Abraham in the Chaldean city of Ur. They mixed astronomy and astrology together. The City of Ur was very advanced in Science in their day. Yet there was a lot of error and Abraham was called out of Ur to separate himself from their error.Such as?
Darwin promoted a theory of slow and gradual evolution and that has been shown to be wrong. Eldredge and Gould promoted Punctuated equilibrium.Did not mean Darwinism was wrong.
Yes your right I did not get it right and I grabbed the wrong book off of the shelf. When we need to looking at is: "Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo" by Sean B. Carroll SEAN CARROLL is a professor of molecular biology and genetics so he has the qualifications that you are looking for.Meyer - not Meyers. You can't even get your own people right!
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?