Evolution

[Servant of Jesus]

So evolutionary theory would predict that there is no reason why we couldn't one day have a new race of superhuman beings.

Well, depends if the environment favours it.

Has nothing to do with environment- depends on whether God decides to put some smarts back into the human race and kick-starts a beneficial mutation.

The way things are going, I hope He decides to make this happen sooner, rather than later.

 

[matthewgar]

Has nothing to do with environment- depends on whether God decides to put some smarts back into the human race and kick-starts a beneficial mutation.

The way things are going, I hope He decides to make this happen sooner, rather than later.

There was a interesting movie a few years ago called Idiocracy, where the couch potatoes, wife beaters and such outbred the nerds, smart, and successful people so that after a few hundred years, the smartest person on the planet was a idiot from the 20th centuary :> Sort of the opposite idea.

 

[crawfish]

Has nothing to do with environment- depends on whether God decides to put some smarts back into the human race and kick-starts a beneficial mutation.

The way things are going, I hope He decides to make this happen sooner, rather than later.

God working through evolution? Can't be, creationists tell me that's impossible.

 

[Cabal]

Has nothing to do with environment- depends on whether God decides to put some smarts back into the human race and kick-starts a beneficial mutation.

The way things are going, I hope He decides to make this happen sooner, rather than later.

Depends how you consider God to have control over the situation. The selector in natural selection is the environment. God could just as easily be manipulating that, rather than splicing genes in ex nihilo.

 

[matthewgar]

Has nothing to do with environment- depends on whether God decides to put some smarts back into the human race and kick-starts a beneficial mutation.

The way things are going, I hope He decides to make this happen sooner, rather than later.

Well were at the point now where we can manipulate our own evolution through genetic changes, or simply selective breeding, of course the problem is that certain groups could already be said to be doing that like I mentioned in the idiocracy post heh.

 

[Cabal]

Okay...let me rephrase that. Evolutionist believe man evolved from ancient apes.

Thank you, so you agree with people's objections to the strawman you raised about what evolution claims.

I don't ask you to take me in any way...serious or not. I ask you to pay attention to what is written.

Seeing as this is your opinion and nothing else, this is about you more than you accept.

I accepted it as it is what was taught. I was foolish but I didn't remain so.

Clearly you did, if you think science operates primarily on authority.

I don't refer to people as fools....God did. The choice of verses was mine.

So stand by your own choice to do so, instead of passing the blame onto God.

Now, why don't you have the decency to stand by your choice of evolution being what is taught instead of passing it off as "your idea of evolution was for the wrong reason," or "it's not modern apes," etc.

You do realise that parroting your opponent's phrases in a way that makes little to no sense whatsoever isn't a particularly good debate tactic? Maybe just accept that you made a mistake and stop being smug.

 

[Assyrian]

Here is another wonderful quote....

Proverbs 4:5 Get wisdom, get understanding: forget it not; neither decline from the words of My mouth.
.

Interesting verse, what do you think it means?

 

[1whirlwind]

Thank you, so you agree with people's objections to the strawman you raised about what evolution claims.

Hardly. I was pointing out the silliness betwen claiming ancient ape over modern ape...it makes no difference.

Seeing as this is your opinion and nothing else, this is about you more than you accept.

My opinion isn't contained in the Bible.

Clearly you did, if you think science operates primarily on authority.

I'm not discussing how science operates. I'm discussing evolution of man from apes (ancient apes ) as being a lie.

So stand by your own choice to do so, instead of passing the blame onto God.

I stand by my choice, my choice of God's Words...do you?

You do realise that parroting your opponent's phrases in a way that makes little to no sense whatsoever isn't a particularly good debate tactic? Maybe just accept that you made a mistake and stop being smug.

Mistake? On what?


Oh, you mean that evolution just has to be true. That God lied to us and instead of creating man in His image, after His likeness, and He doing this while creating them male and female....as WRITTEN...instead He slowly evolved us from apes.

All smugness aside...No Cabal...I didn't make a mistake.


.

 

[Happy Hearts Club]

Oh, you mean that evolution just has to be true. That God lied to us and instead of creating man in His image, after His likeness, and He doing this while creating them male and female....as WRITTEN...instead He slowly evolved us from apes.

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. (Gen.2:7)

Man became alive only after God formed him. According to evolution, man was already alive "as" he was being "formed".

So clearly, God didn't "evolve" us, I agree.

 

[1whirlwind]

Interesting verse, what do you think it means?

Proverbs 4:5 Get wisdom, get understanding: forget it not; neither decline from the words of My mouth.

It is interesting.
​

Mark 13:23 But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.

Where did He tell us?
​

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

The Scriptures. When we are taught we search them to see if it is true...or not. Evolution isn't.
​

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

To answer your question..we are not to decline from the words of His mouth, means....What is written is truth. When man teaches the opposite of the written word, and the opposite of the revelation of the word as given us by His Spirit then we are to search the scriptures to see if it is true. Wisdom and understanding are there for us.


.
​

 

[Assyrian]

Proverbs 4:5 Get wisdom, get understanding: forget it not; neither decline from the words of My mouth.

It is interesting.
​

Mark 13:23 But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.

Where did He tell us?
​

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

The Scriptures. When we are taught we search them to see if it is true...or not. Evolution isn't.
​

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

To answer your question..we are not to decline from the words of His mouth, means....What is written is truth. When man teaches the opposite of the written word, and the opposite of the revelation of the word as given us by His Spirit then we are to search the scriptures to see if it is true. Wisdom and understanding are there for us.
.​

​

By His mouth, you mean God's? Because I thought the verse you quoted was an interesting example of how easy it is to misunderstand scripture. You see the person speaking here is Solomon (Prov 1:1) giving advice to his son (Prov 1:8 and 4:10). When he said "the word's of my mouth" he meant his own mouth, not God's, hence the capitalisation of the 'My' is wrong. It is not a big thing, and after all it is still inspired scripture, but it shows we need to understand what scripture is saying it and how it is saying it.

Also very interesting how Solomon's lesson in seeking wisdom flows into this beautiful metaphor of wisdom as a woman.
Prov 4:5 Get wisdom; get insight; do not forget, and do not turn away from the words of my mouth.
6 Do not forsake her, and she will keep you; love her, and she will guard you.
7 The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom, and whatever you get, get insight.
8 Prize her highly, and she will exalt you; she will honour you if you embrace her.
9 She will place on your head a graceful garland; she will bestow on you a beautiful crown."
Biblical wisdom is much more comfortable with metaphor than many Christians are today.

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

The Scriptures. When we are taught we search them to see if it is true...or not. Evolution isn't.
​

So, if you have searched the scripture, where does it say evolution isn't true? You see, I have searched the scripture too, and it doesn't say evolution is a lie. It does speak in metaphors and it does show us how people often misunderstand these metaphors, it regularly uses the the metaphor of people being made of dust, of God being the potter and we are the clay, but I haven't found anywhere we are told to take this literally. Perhaps you have misunderstood?

 

[Achilles6129]

The Bible simply disagrees with evolution - and that is a fact. There is no reconciling Genesis with the hypothesis of evolution.

The god of evolution uses countless and infinite millions of years of death and suffering to achieve his ends. This completely contradicts the account of the Bible:

"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good." Gen. 1:21

I hardly find anything good about millions upon millions of years of these creatures suffering and dying from various diseases "good." It is astonishing that anyone could arrive at such an interpretation.

"And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good." Gen. 1:25

Here it is again - countless millions of years of suffering and death called "good."

"And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." Gen. 1:31

Of course, this is after God has created the human race - which took countless millions of years of incredible death, pain, and suffering from floods, volcanoes, wild animals, diseases, wars, etc. And every thing that he had made was "very good"?? I think not.

The god of evolution is an incompetent god. He's not a very good designer, and he doesn't care much for his creation. He has no qualms about using millions of years of death, pain, and suffering to achieve his own ends. In short, the god of evolution is not the God of the Bible. And evolution is not how the human race, nor how the world, came about.

Evolutionists have misinterpreted the geologic column in favor of evolution, when it is in fact a testament to the global flood of Noah. The Bible claims that Noah's flood was global - and if there was indeed a global flood, then that destroys evolution's claim. Therefore, the sediments that evolutionist's are claiming were laid down over millions of years were in fact (at least, most of them) laid down in a short time during Noah's Flood.

Genesis was telling the truth all along.

 

[Assyrian]

The Bible simply disagrees with evolution - and that is a fact. There is no reconciling Genesis with the hypothesis of evolution.

The god of evolution uses countless and infinite millions of years of death and suffering to achieve his ends. This completely contradicts the account of the Bible:

"And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good." Gen. 1:21

I hardly find anything good about millions upon millions of years of these creatures suffering and dying from various diseases "good." It is astonishing that anyone could arrive at such an interpretation.

"And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good." Gen. 1:25

Here it is again - countless millions of years of suffering and death called "good."

"And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." Gen. 1:31

Of course, this is after God has created the human race - which took countless millions of years of incredible death, pain, and suffering from floods, volcanoes, wild animals, diseases, wars, etc. And every thing that he had made was "very good"?? I think not.

The god of evolution is an incompetent god. He's not a very good designer, and he doesn't care much for his creation. He has no qualms about using millions of years of death, pain, and suffering to achieve his own ends. In short, the god of evolution is not the God of the Bible. And evolution is not how the human race, nor how the world, came about.

Job 38:41 Who provides for the raven its prey, when its young ones cry to God for help, and wander about for lack of food?
Is God not good, is he doing wrong, when he provides prey for the raven and its young?

Evolutionists have misinterpreted the geologic column in favor of evolution, when it is in fact a testament to the global flood of Noah. The Bible claims that Noah's flood was global - and if there was indeed a global flood, then that destroys evolution's claim. Therefore, the sediments that evolutionist's are claiming were laid down over millions of years were in fact (at least, most of them) laid down in a short time during Noah's Flood.

Genesis was telling the truth all along.

A global flood doesn't contradict evolution, it has nothing to do with life evolving over hundreds of million of years. The problem with a global flood is that the evidence says there wasn't one, there is no sign of it in the geological column and no sign of the genetic bottlenecks it would produce if every species on earth descended from a handful of animals a few thousand years ago. But that is a problem for a global flood, not evolution. All there is is the Creationist claim the sediments in the geological column were laid down in the flood. But the bible doesn't say that. That is simply a creationist claim trying to explain the fossil record. All this shows us is that creationists claim evolution isn't true, well we know that anyway. But it isn't the bible contradicting evolution. In fact the bible doesn't even say the flood was global so it isn't even an issue.

 

[Achilles6129]

Job 38:41 Who provides for the raven its prey, when its young ones cry to God for help, and wander about for lack of food?
Is God not good, is he doing wrong, when he provides prey for the raven and its young?

Yes, and this is a post-fall raven. The god of evolution most certainly didn't provide for any of his creation, as they underwent millions upon millions of years of death, disease, volcanoes, plagues, suffering, incest, rape, war, famine, flood, disasters, and what not, all so this god of evolution could achieve his own ends. All of this and he claimed that his creation was "very good."

But there is good news. The god of evolution is not the God of the Bible.

A global flood doesn't contradict evolution, it has nothing to do with life evolving over hundreds of million of years.

We're going to have to disagree on this. I started a thread elsewhere and we can discuss it on there if you want.

The problem with a global flood is that the evidence says there wasn't one, there is no sign of it in the geological column and no sign of the genetic bottlenecks it would produce if every species on earth descended from a handful of animals a few thousand years ago. But that is a problem for a global flood, not evolution. All there is is the Creationist claim the sediments in the geological column were laid down in the flood. But the bible doesn't say that. That is simply a creationist claim trying to explain the fossil record. All this shows us is that creationists claim evolution isn't true, well we know that anyway. But it isn't the bible contradicting evolution. In fact the bible doesn't even say the flood was global so it isn't even an issue.

We can go around on this all day - the Bible says the flood was global. See my replies on my other thread. But anyways, as far as there being evidence for the Great Flood, it is extensive. I cannot post all of it as that would take way too much time, but here's a starting place for you:

Get Answers - Answers in Genesis

Global Flood (Dr. John Baumgardner's website - a world renowned scientist)

- The True.Origin Archive - (most of these articles are by scientists)

That is only a starting point. There is much more out there. There are literally thousands of credientialed creationist scientists who are just as intelligent as their evolutionist counterparts, and graduate from the same universities.

 

[matthewgar]

Yes, and this is a post-fall raven. The god of evolution most certainly didn't provide for any of his creation, as they underwent millions upon millions of years of death, disease, volcanoes, plagues, suffering, incest, rape, war, famine, flood, disasters, and what not, all so this god of evolution could achieve his own ends. All of this and he claimed that his creation was "very good."

But there is good news. The god of evolution is not the God of the Bible.



We're going to have to disagree on this. I started a thread elsewhere and we can discuss it on there if you want.




We can go around on this all day - the Bible says the flood was global. See my replies on my other thread. But anyways, as far as there being evidence for the Great Flood, it is extensive. I cannot post all of it as that would take way too much time, but here's a starting place for you:

Get Answers - Answers in Genesis

Global Flood (Dr. John Baumgardner's website - a world renowned scientist)

- The True.Origin Archive - (most of these articles are by scientists)

That is only a starting point. There is much more out there. There are literally thousands of credientialed creationist scientists who are just as intelligent as their evolutionist counterparts, and graduate from the same universities.

Most of those people arn't scientists, or arn't in the appropriate fields.

Second of all, whats this god of evolution? Since all the facts point to evolution being true, and the god of the bible is true, they must be the same being. Maybe the problem is the god your worshipping isn't the one that created the universe? After all if your not worshipping the "God of evolution" then who are you? And lets for a second argue that your wrong, and evolution is true, and you been lied to by those who were decieved by Satan, how much do you think god will appreciate all the lies spread, and the turning of people from god when reality conflicts with the lies you guys repeat that were told to you by conmen and liars?

 

[Assyrian]

Yes, and this is a post-fall raven.

If rabbits dying would have been bad before the fall, it is just as bad after, and God is doing what intrinsically wrong. Humans sinning should not change God's moral standards.

The god of evolution most certainly didn't provide for any of his creation,

So God provided prey for raptors but not velociraptors?

as they underwent millions upon millions of years of death, disease, volcanoes, plagues, suffering, incest, rape, war, famine, flood, disasters, and what not, all so this god of evolution could achieve his own ends. All of this and he claimed that his creation was "very good."

God doesn't send floods?

But there is good news. The god of evolution is not the God of the Bible.

Fortunately the creationism God you are portraying is not the God of the bible, Buddhists and Vegans have a higher moral standard and a more consistent one too.

We're going to have to disagree on this. I started a thread elsewhere and we can discuss it on there if you want.

We can go around on this all day - the Bible says the flood was global. See my replies on my other thread. But anyways, as far as there being evidence for the Great Flood, it is extensive. I cannot post all of it as that would take way too much time, but here's a starting place for you:

Get Answers - Answers in Genesis

Global Flood (Dr. John Baumgardner's website - a world renowned scientist)

- The True.Origin Archive - (most of these articles are by scientists)

That is only a starting point. There is much more out there. There are literally thousands of credientialed creationist scientists who are just as intelligent as their evolutionist counterparts, and graduate from the same universities.

 

[Achilles6129]

Most of those people arn't scientists, or arn't in the appropriate fields.

In fact, they are scientists, and are in the appropriate fields (and, by the way, "arn't" is spelled "aren't"). Maybe you should try reading some of their papers - because some of them are world-renowned scientists (Russell Humphreys, Kurt Wise, John Baumgardner, etc.). Here's a few of them for you: Creation scientists and other biographies of interest

Second of all, whats this god of evolution? Since all the facts point to evolution being true, and the god of the bible is true, they must be the same being.

Nope. The God of the Bible saw his creation, and saw that it was "very good" after he had made Adam and Eve. That means that after countless millions of years of pain, suffering, death, plagues, rape, incest, war, and a thousand calamities, this god of evolution thought that it was "very good."

Sorry, that may work for you, but that ain't gonna fly in reality. The god of evolution and the God of the Bible do not mix. One is evil, cruel, selfish, and does not care in the slightest about his creation nor how many of them die to achieve his selfish ends. The other is kind to the unthankful and evil, created everything good (no death for the human race to begin with), died on the cross for the human race, desires that no one perish, and, eventually, will take anyone who obeys his gospel to a place where there is no death, suffering, plague, nor rape, which is exactly what happened for hundreds of thousands and millions of years according to the hypothesis of evolution.

Here are a few quotes from Baumgardner that I believe to be pertinent:

Origins Debate - Baumgardner: Problems with Evolution

It may be a shock to Mr. Mark and many other evolutionists, but evolution is not "the only scientifically plausible interpretation" of the pattern of fossil succession. There indeed is a testable alternative. This alternative is related to the ubiquitous evidence of catastrophism in the Paleozoic and Mesozoic portion of the geological record. In my 2/23/95 letter I pointed out how evolutionists seem oblivious to this evidence. Mr. Mark admitted he did not see its relevance.

What is the alternative? It is a catastrophe, driven by processes in the earth's interior, that progressively but quickly resurfaced the planet. An event of this type has recently been documented to have occurred on the planet Venus (see Strom et al, The global resurfacing of Venus, Journal of Geophysical Research, 99, 10899-10926, 1994). This conclusion is based on the high resolution mapping of Venus performed by the Magellan spacecraft that revealed fully 84% of the craters on Venus to be in pristine condition and only 2.5% embayed by lava although intense volcanism and tectonism has erased all earlier craters from the face of the planet. Volcanic and tectonic activity since the resurfacing event has been minimal.

My point here is that there is an alternative explanation for the pattern of fossils observed in the rock record. Instead of an evolutionary sequence, the pattern represents the sequence of destruction of ecological habitat in a global tectonic catastrophe. There exists abundant observational data by which this alternative explanation can be tested in a thorough fashion.

 

[shernren]

Yes, and this is a post-fall raven. The god of evolution most certainly didn't provide for any of his creation, as they underwent millions upon millions of years of death, disease, volcanoes, plagues, suffering, incest, rape, war, famine, flood, disasters, and what not, all so this god of evolution could achieve his own ends. All of this and he claimed that his creation was "very good."

But there is good news. The god of evolution is not the God of the Bible.

So when did God cancel His PETA membership? Put that way, I think you should see the problem immediately: the God of the Bible does not change. He is "the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change" (James 1:17). If death in the animal kingdom was not something good before the Fall, what makes it good after the Fall?

Oh, I know you will reply that it is punishment for man's sin. Is it really? Listen to what God has to say about that:

And to Adam he said,
“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife
and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you,
‘You shall not eat of it,’

cursed is the ground because of you;
in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.

​​​​​​​​By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread,
till you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;
for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”
(Gen 3:17-19, ESV)
​

Do you see the part where God warns Adam that the lions don't eat tofu any more, and the alligators aren't going to take kindly to petting? I don't, because it's not there. And yet you'd think that God would have told Adam about a change as important and drastic as half the animal kingdom suddenly thinking of him as a walking warm hunk of meat.

And what about the Romans passages? Well, Romans 5:12 says that death spread to all men because all sinned, not to all creation; and Romans 8:21 says nothing specifically either about the state of creation before the Fall or about whether animals ate animals. So at the end of the day the only Scriptural passages concerning carnivory are passages where God uses them to glorify Himself.

That's a funny thing to do for a God who originally created a vegetarian world. If you think about it, since sin was the Devil's introduction, if you believe that carnivory was a direct consequence of man's sin, then you are saying that God is glorified by the Devil's greatest, most cruel invention. I think that's a topsy-turvy view of the world to take - a little like Winston Churchill claiming credit for the V2 bombings.

That is only a starting point. There is much more out there. There are literally thousands of credientialed creationist scientists who are just as intelligent as their evolutionist counterparts, and graduate from the same universities.

Oh, none of us TEs doubt that, in case you were wondering. Of course you will find that most of these credentialed scientists are actually engineers preaching about biology, and chemists holding forth on nuclear dating, and other kinds of queerly mis-credentialed miscreants. But it's not that we doubt that there are creationists who (think they) know what they're talking about. We just think they're wrong. So you can forget about the links - because we don't often use them ourselves - and step up to the plate and tell us what you think is accurate or not as a description of our God's wonderful creation.

 

[Achilles6129]

If rabbits dying would have been bad before the fall, it is just as bad after, and God is doing what intrinsically wrong. Humans sinning should not change God's moral standards.

Negative. God never intended that rabbits die, nor that any human being ever die. That was not his intention. On the contrary, the god of evolution's intention is to have his creation die, and he instigates millions upon millions of years of death (not to mention hundreds of thousands of years of rape/incest) just to get to Genesis chapter 3.

He (the god of evolution)is not a very competent designer at all. God never intended any death whatsoever - that's how it worked out because of the fall. However, God will save anyone who obeys the real gospel from death for all eternity - see Rev. 21. And that is God's will.

God doesn't send floods?

This is post-fall, Assyrian. God's original intent was never that there ever be any floods to destroy anyone. There was never any death in the world as God created it - and that was what he wanted. But that changed because of the fall.

In short, the human race must obey the real gospel of Jesus Christ in order to be saved. Disobedience will eventually mean death (which is defined as eternal separation from God - see Rev. 20:11-15, the "second death"). By their disobedience, they bring upon themselves the wrath of God (see Rom. 1).

 

[matthewgar]

In fact, they are scientists, and are in the appropriate fields (and, by the way, "arn't" is spelled "aren't"). Maybe you should try reading some of their papers - because some of them are world-renowned scientists (Russell Humphreys, Kurt Wise, John Baumgardner, etc.). Here's a few of them for you: Creation scientists and other biographies of interest



Nope. The God of the Bible saw his creation, and saw that it was "very good" after he had made Adam and Eve. That means that after countless millions of years of pain, suffering, death, plagues, rape, incest, war, and a thousand calamities, this god of evolution thought that it was "very good."

Sorry, that may work for you, but that ain't gonna fly in reality. The god of evolution and the God of the Bible do not mix. One is evil, cruel, selfish, and does not care in the slightest about his creation nor how many of them die to achieve his selfish ends. The other is kind to the unthankful and evil, created everything good (no death for the human race to begin with), died on the cross for the human race, desires that no one perish, and, eventually, will take anyone who obeys his gospel to a place where there is no death, suffering, plague, nor rape, which is exactly what happened for hundreds of thousands and millions of years according to the hypothesis of evolution.

Here are a few quotes from Baumgardner that I believe to be pertinent:

Origins Debate - Baumgardner: Problems with Evolution

Thanks on the correction of the spelling, heh just a bad habit. As for the credentials again, being a engineer doesn't give anyone credentials to speak of biology, would you go to a dentist to have brain surgery, they both are doctors and can perform surgeries, but one I wouldn't trust the guy outside of his field.

Second of all, wich god that you describe there is shown in this world? I don't see him as that way but guess what, the world is a harsh place, animals and humans die of plagues every year, the entire world is based on death, you might blame this on sin, but I"ve never heard a good explanation or method for how the so called sin created a world of balance. It's not perfect but there is balance.

How did sin know to give the animals that already had the teeth good for tearing each other apart the hunger for meat, or did sin some how transform these animals into meat eaters?

Also you have to explain the genetic and fossil evidence for evolution, as I showed back in those two videos on cat and dog evolution from a common ancestor wich conviently no creationist has even acknowledged, are you guys admiting defeat and just going to pretend like the evidence doesn't exist as usual. You guys make assertions and claims, that conflict with reality. I can see the evidence, the choice is either to be like you guys lie to myself and others, hide my head in the sand, or accept the evidence, and from there either reject god, or accept that god did it. I chose reality and since I know god exists I folllow that he created everything through evolution.