Great.
This thread is about creationists trying to make scientific arguments against evolution and failing.
Upvote
0
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.
Great.Many Christian beliefs go against science such as Jesus raising the dead or the parting of the Red Sea. That is why Christianity is based in faith not science.
Not at all - I am attempting to correct the nearly universal errors creationists make when THEY attempt to prop up their religion by making erroneous arguments against evolution.Because you are attempting to argue science with people of faith.
You're a regular genius.It doesn't matter that it's 'just a rearrangement' no child is going to be born with a working beak.
Hi SLP,
Thanks for your response:
I believe that we need to understand that when anyone, (creationist, atheist, scientist, biologist) tries to use scientific methodology to explain anything that God has done...it fails.
I agree that science has not proved that God has done those things. Quite the contrary, science has, when used to look into any of those things, found no evidence at all that they even occurred (as depicted in the ancient tales). And when they did, the evidence is that the bible stories are not accurate.Here is just a shortlist of the things that God has claimed to have done in His word that, as far as I'm aware, science has not been able to prove:
Flooding the entire earth.
Turning a river, and all ground water of an entire city/nation to blood.
Causing both fire and ice to rain down from the sky at the same time.
Causing a shadow to go backwards.
Parting a sea to cause a wall of water to stand on both sides of a chasm.
Causing a woman, never having sexual relations, to be pregnant.
Raising a dead man from the grave.
It was not meant to be offensive - it was an acknowledgement of your implied position.I won't take offense, because I've been in these discussions a lot and I know how people are prone to use the fallacy of 'education' to counter such claims as are being made on this thread, but...
Except Adam only live to be 930 years old and was created on day 6. Really doesn't fit, does it?
Good for you.That's because we already like who we are and what we believe.
The Bible says that sin caused death. So no death before sin. (animal and human)It says that Eve is the mother of all the living and that we all inherited original sin from Adam. Those are the firm facts the Bible lays out. It says God made man on day 6, breathed into his nostrils and he became a living being. He wasn't stupid or an ape-man, he was a man who could talk and reason.
Wow, your anti-genius shines brightly, as is so often the case.actually its a fusion of 2 ancectral human chromosomes. so this is evidence for common descent of human with...human.
When the argument is lost, the loser resorts to threats of damnation.I love it when it always comes down to a threat in the end. Stay classy.
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?