Creationists: How does creation explain the existence of parasites?

[pitabread]

Of course I do.

But not against Him.

Do you think that studying creation is using our brains against god?

(I'm going to be honest with you, I don't think you give your god very much credit.)

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you think that studying creation is using our brains against god?

That's a loaded question.

God gave us brains; but not to use against Him.

I like to call that: "going Nimrod."

 

[AV1611VET]

(I'm going to be honest with you, I don't think you give your god very much credit.)

Would you know it, if I did?

 

[dlamberth]

Were you a conscious objector in the Army?

When I got my draft notice for the first time in my life I went through an inner search. I know you were around back than and know the social turmoil with the war and all and I did think a lot about conscious objector status. But when being honest with myself I rejected that. But...I realized that I could not shoot another human being, so I went into the Air Force and worked on navigational equipment on B-52's and KC-135 refueling aircraft's.

And for the record, I do salute and thank you for your service to this great country.

And I salute you for your service to this great country as well.

 

[dlamberth]

That's a loaded question.

God gave us brains; but not to use against Him.

I like to call that: "going Nimrod."

What I'm not understanding is that when using our brains and seeing how evolution is how God creates new life forms, that kind of brain activity is rejected as Satan thinking. Yet it's totally with and for God.

 

[AV1611VET]

What I'm not understanding is that when using our brains and seeing how evolution is how God creates new life forms,

There's more to it than that, my friend.

You then have to start "seeing" links that aren't there.

You then have to overlook missing links as ... well ... just missing.

You then have to "see" deep time.

And on and on.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Were you a conscious objector in the Army?

And for the record, I do salute and thank you for your service to this great country.

I see how I misunderstood your post, clearly @diamberth did not understand you either. He said this in his prior post:

"Nope...I was drafted and doing war stuff."

If he was drafted and doing war stuff how could he have been a conscientious objector? That seems to me to be a contradiction.

 

[AV1611VET]

If he was drafted and doing war stuff how could he have been a conscientious objector? That seems to me to be a contradiction.

QV please:

Some conscientious objectors are unwilling to serve the military in any capacity, while others accept noncombatant roles. While conscientious objection is usually the refusal to collaborate with military organizations, as a combatant in war or in any supportive role, some advocate compromising forms of conscientious objection. One compromising form is to accept non-combatant roles during conscription or military service.

SOURCE

 

[Bungle_Bear]

QV please:

SOURCE

Desmond Doss. What a guy!

 

[AV1611VET]

Desmond Doss. What a guy!

Shoichi Yokoi. What a guy!

 

[dlamberth]

There's more to it than that, my friend.

You then have to start "seeing" links that aren't there.

You then have to overlook missing links as ... well ... just missing.

You then have to "see" deep time.

And on and on.

I know that you know that there is way more to the science behind evolution than any of that.

But ancient creation myths over the science? I just don't get it.

 

[AV1611VET]

But ancient creation myths over the science? I just don't get it.

I do.

These "myths" were generated by a process called diabolical mimicry, or diabolical plagiarism.

It's a fancy term, but basically it means that, for whatever God has, Satan has a cheap imitation for.

Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

The Ark story is my "poster child" for that one.

Nations all over the earth have a version of what happened but, guess what? they differ substantially in details.

Thus the Bible exposes them as fake.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Shoichi Yokoi. What a guy!

Huh? He wasn't a conscientious objector.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There's more to it than that, my friend.

You then have to start "seeing" links that aren't there.

You then have to overlook missing links as ... well ... just missing.

You then have to "see" deep time.

And on and on.

Missing links is a term used by either the dishonest or the ignorant. There are more than enough fossils to show man's evolution from Australopithecines and their ancestors to us. There is no problem "seeing deep time". It is all but impossible not to see it if one takes even a shallow dip into the sciences.

The evidence for evolution is so strong that for there not to be evolution God would have had to have planted endless false evidence, In other words claiming that Genesis should be read literally is the same as you calling God a liar. I do not think that God would lie if he existed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do.

These "myths" were generated by a process called diabolical mimicry, or diabolical plagiarism.

It's a fancy term, but basically it means that, for whatever God has, Satan has a cheap imitation for.

Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

The Ark story is my "poster child" for that one.

Nations all over the earth have a version of what happened but, guess what? they differ substantially in details.

Thus the Bible exposes them as fake.

You need to look up the definition of "exposes".

 

[AV1611VET]

Missing links is a term used by either the dishonest or the ignorant. There are more than enough fossils to show man's evolution from Australopithecines and their ancestors to us.

That's like saying missing links in a bicycle chain is a term used by either the dishonest or the ignorant, since there are more than enough other links in the chain to keep riding.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's like saying missing links in a bicycle chain is a term used by either the dishonest or the ignorant, since there are more than enough other links in the chain to keep riding.

Not even close. Your analogy skills are lacking. If one was looking at an ancient chain and there were missing links in it would you deny that there ever could have been an original chain? That is the sort of error that you are making.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

That's like saying missing links in a bicycle chain is a term used by either the dishonest or the ignorant, since there are more than enough other links in the chain to keep riding.

So you know it's a bicycle chain even with missing links? How does that work?

 

[pitabread]

That's a loaded question.

God gave us brains; but not to use against Him.

I like to call that: "going Nimrod."

It's a perfectly straight-forward question, but your evasiveness is noted.

Anyway, let's get back to the thread topic at hand. Do you have anything else to say about the parasite in the OP or are you still bowing out of that topic?

If it's the latter, then feel free free to take this current line of discussion elsewhere.

 

[pitabread]

There's more to it than that, my friend.

You then have to start "seeing" links that aren't there.

You then have to overlook missing links as ... well ... just missing.

You then have to "see" deep time.

And on and on.

Not the thread topic. Please refrain from derailing the thread any more than it's being derailed, thanks.