First born

[Loudmouth]

.
The following is the subject of the OP, get back on subject.

If evolution is true, then there shouldn't have been a single individual born who was the first mammal. That's the answer.

 

[JIMINZ]

And it was a poorly formed question since there was no "first mammal". And what makes you think that we cannot come to a consensus. Some of us will cover different aspects of this but over all we agree.

.
Nah not really.

 

[lesliedellow]

.
Nah not really.

Yes really.

 

[JIMINZ]

If evolution is true, then there shouldn't have been a single individual born who was the first mammal. That's the answer.

.
That's just the point, Evolution isn't true, and there was a first individual born.
I gave the name of the first documented Mammal, Cain.

That answered the question......Period

 

[JIMINZ]

Yes really.

.
NAH

 

[lesliedellow]

.
That's just the point, Evolution isn't true, and there was a first individual born.
I gave the name of the first documented Mammal, Cain.

That answered the question......Period

Mere assertion doesn't make something true. A mountain's worth of evidence does.

 

[JIMINZ]

Mere assertion doesn't make something true. A mountain's worth of evidence does.

.
Why then do you keep pushing the Theory of Evolution as though it was in fact the truth when we all know it is nothing more than and assertion, assumption, supposition, conjecture....HUH?

 

[lesliedellow]

.
Why then do you keep pushing the Theory of Evolution as though it was in fact the truth when we all know it is nothing more than and assertion, assumption, supposition, conjecture....HUH?

Because it is nothing of the kind, no matter how much fundies might wish it were otherwise.

 

[Subduction Zone]

.
That's just the point, Evolution isn't true, and there was a first individual born.
I gave the name of the first documented Mammal, Cain.

That answered the question......Period

Nope, Cain is mythical. You might as well have said Babe the Great Blue Ox.

The OP's question was poorly formed because there was no first mammal any more than there was the first person that spoke Spanish.

Who was the first Spanish speaker?

 

[bhsmte]

.
That's just the point, Evolution isn't true, and there was a first individual born.
I gave the name of the first documented Mammal, Cain.

That answered the question......Period

LOL

 

[JIMINZ]

Nope, Cain is mythical. You might as well have said Babe the Great Blue Ox.

The OP's question was poorly formed because there was no first mammal any more than there was the first person that spoke Spanish.

Who was the first Spanish speaker?

.

Who was the first Spanish speaker?

.

I'll have to get back with you on that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

.

.

I'll have to get back with you on that.

I have a feeling that you won't. Once you understand how languages evolve you will begin to have an understanding of how species evolve. There are quite a few similarities.

 

[lesliedellow]

.
I'll have to get back with you on that.

You won't be able to find a first Spanish speaker because there never was one. Spanish gradually evolved from Latin over a period of two thousand years, and at no point during that gradual process would it be possible to identify a day and date when the lest Spaniard spoke Latin, or the first Spaniard spoke Spanish.

In fact, there is a family tree of languages, analogous to the phylogenetic tree of species.

family tree of european languages - Google Search:

 

[JIMINZ]

You won't be able to find a first Spanish speaker because there never was one. Spanish gradually evolved from Latin over a period of two thousand years, and at no point during that gradual process would it be possible to identify a day and date when the lest Spaniard spoke Latin, or the first Spaniard spoke Spanish.

In fact, there is a family tree of languages, analogous to the phylogenetic tree of species.

family tree of european languages - Google Search:

.
MAN! !
Now you spoiled it, Subduction Zone, was attempting to get me into a discussion of Spanish, and now I know the answer to his question, I don't think he's going to be to pleased about that.
You see, you see, I'm really stupid, and have no clue as to what I am talking about, and he was going to expose me as a dolt to everyone.

 

[bhsmte]

.
MAN! !
Now you spoiled it, Subduction Zone, was attempting to get me into a discussion of Spanish, and now I know the answer to his question, I don't think he's going to be to pleased about that.
You see, you see, I'm really stupid, and have no clue as to what I am talking about, and he was going to expose me as a dolt to everyone.

Interesting

 

[Subduction Zone]

.
MAN! !
Now you spoiled it, Subduction Zone, was attempting to get me into a discussion of Spanish, and now I know the answer to his question, I don't think he's going to be to pleased about that.
You see, you see, I'm really stupid, and have no clue as to what I am talking about, and he was going to expose me as a dolt to everyone.

I don't have to do anything to do that. I am merely here to try to help you to understand.

You do know that some of the people arguing against you are fellow Christians don't you? One does not have to reject Christianity to accept the theory of evolution.

 

[JIMINZ]

I don't have to do anything to do that. I am merely here to try to help you to understand.

You do know that some of the people arguing against you are fellow Christians don't you? One does not have to reject Christianity to accept the theory of evolution.

.
Watch out there, your ignorance of the Spiritual is showing.
"No man can serve two masters"

 

[Subduction Zone]

.
Watch out there, your ignorance of the Spiritual is showing.
"No man can serve two masters"

No ignorance on my part. You are merely making a huge error about the Bible.

 

[Nithavela]

.
Watch out there, your ignorance of the Spiritual is showing.
"No man can serve two masters"

Would you say that the people in this thread who have a christian faith icon and who claim to believe in evolution are in fact no christians?

 

[JIMINZ]

Would you say that the people in this thread who have a christian faith icon and who claim to believe in evolution are in fact no christians?

.
My belief is, the Bible teaches Creationism, while the world through Science teaches Evolution.

Evolution is a contradiction of Creationism, therefore, these two understandings are diametrically opposed.

Anyone declaring that they believe in Creationism, and Evolution at the same time, would then need to make a choice between the two, they are by Definition, mutually exclusive.


Would you say that the people in this thread who have an Atheist or Agnostic icon who claim to believe in Evolution, would ever believe in Creationism at the same time?