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.
What "details"? I could not see any.
And here we get to the nub of your posts. This is a claim that needs to be supported with scientific evidence, not rhetoric. So far you have failed at that reasonable demand.But rocks, dust, gas, and sunlight will never turn into a horse ... nor even be able to turn a bacteria into a horse ... in all of time.
If this is an attempt at a logical argument, it falls well short. It's just a non-sequitur.
It now appears that even you realize that you have no details. You could have simply posted a supposed "detail". You kept ranting about the details and when asked for specific examples you could not provide any.I would answer that but cannot tell what you would then claim not to see - in my next post. So that makes the discussion less interesting over time.
I make this claim about rocks/matter
They don't "have that as a property of matter" and they don't have the ability to "acquire the skill over time"
And here we get to the nub of your posts. This is a claim that needs to be supported with scientific evidence,
But they do "have that as a property of matter". .
Ignored. Try again without the rhetoric. Proper sources and evidence please.BobRyan said: ↑
But rocks, dust, gas, and sunlight will never turn into a horse ... nor even be able to turn a bacteria into a horse ... in all of time.
you are not using reason here - because as soon as you argue that rocks all by themselves with not "infinite ability at all" can turn into a horse over time... then "obviously" an infinite Being can turn dust into a horse in a day... according to you rocks already do that but need more time to complete the job.
That means BOTH sides are agreeing (in your model ) that it is very reasonable to state that infinite God can do that.
It means the only issue left in doubt then - is the rock doing it all on its own (which you appear to want to assume) and of course the creationist (and a lot of others as well ) would not be so quick to make that assumption. Nor is there a lab where that happens in fact Dawkins admits it has never been observed -- while we look. (as noted in post 2)
Of course it did. Water existed. Elements existed. Energy regularly entered and left the system. We really do not need any more than that.No they don't. The barren Earth starting point "A" had no rabbit-making-property
But they do "have that as a property of matter". Your body is made up of the same material as in rocks and minerals.
And here we get to the nub of your posts. This is a claim that needs to be supported with scientific evidence,
Ignored .
Try again without a strawman. All that it takes to refute rhetoric is a wave of ones handMy computer has carbon and petroleum derivatives in it .. that does not mean that rocks "have the property" all on their own to create animations in 3 D -- and if left to themselves the rocks would just do it.
<sigh> More rhetoric. No evidenceBobRyan said: ↑
But rocks, dust, gas, and sunlight will never turn into a horse ... nor even be able to turn a bacteria into a horse ... in all of time.
you are not using reason here - because as soon as you argue that rocks all by themselves with not "infinite ability at all" can turn into a horse over time... then "obviously" an infinite Being can turn dust into a horse in a day... according to you rocks already do that but need more time to complete the job.
That means BOTH sides are agreeing (in your model ) that it is very reasonable to state that infinite God can do that.
It means the only issue left in doubt then - is the rock doing it all on its own (which you appear to want to assume) and of course the creationist (and a lot of others as well ) would not be so quick to make that assumption. Nor is there a lab where that happens in fact Dawkins admits it has never been observed -- while we look. (as noted in post 2)
I will try fewer details next time.
<snip>
My mistake. I meant to type Exodus 20:11--can't much do two things at once any more."seemed to be"?
Ex 16
19 Moses said to them, “No one is to leave any of it until morning.” 20 But they did not listen to Moses, and some left part of it until morning, and it bred worms and stank; and Moses was angry with them. 21 They gathered it morning by morning, everyone as much as he would eat; but when the sun became hot, it would melt. 22 Now on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for each one. When all the leaders of the congregation came and told Moses, 23 And he said unto them, This is that which the Lord hath said, Tomorrow is The Holy Sabbath unto the Lord: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remains over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.
What is your point?
Why are you in Exodus 16 for this topic?
Mutations that take the prokaryote to the level of uekaryote is evolution ... every other change is within the bounds of mutation that is not at all evolution.
I’ll be honest I can’t parse what you are trying to say so I’ll respectfully back out at this time.People live that way because Love exists in all and upholds us all in the faith thereof, wherefore Love is God.
I can still do two things at the same time -- to in the end messing up three things.My mistake. I meant to type Exodus 20:11--can't much do two things at once any more.
Yes it is. That is the mechanism that a population changes it’s genotype and phenotype: the alleles in the population change over time.No it isn't.
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?