God used Evolution to create man

[AV1611VET]

Just as my great grand pappy was here long before I was even thought of the stars were here long before the earth ever formed.

No

 

[Loudmouth]

It's a huge problem for unguided, unintelligent natural processes
to form from simple life forms to extremely complex life forms.

Why is complexity a problem?

 

[Loudmouth]

That's a mouthful of assumptions and speculation.

Why is it that supporters of evolution believe that anyone that doesn't follow their belief is uneducated, taught with false information or of low intelligence.

Do you find it that hard to believe that intelligent, educated people can look at evolution and toss it to the side for something they believe to be the truth?

You claimed that there were no transitional fossils when a quick Google search turns up tons of them.

Why is that?

 

[EternalDragon]

You claimed that there were no transitional fossils when a quick Google search turns up tons of them.

Why is that?

Those are variations within a species via natural selection, trying hard to look like evolution.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

So.....quoting someone's complete and full statement, who is educated and respected in a related and relevant science, when they publicly state their personal view, in something in a way that is contrary to other peoples view in order to support your own is "quote mining"?

Nope, that is not quote-mining, but that is not what I called you out on with your Colin Patterson mining. You didn't present his whole speech, you didn't present the correct context of it, you didn't present the actual truth of it.

I thought that quote mining was when you took parts or portions of a quote, carefully chosen, in order to support your opinion, when in actual fact, if the whole statement was taken in the context it was originally intended, your point would not be supported at all and may if fact be refuted.

Yep, that's what you did.

There goes any chance of quoting any intelligent educated, verified statements on any and every topic, in order to support any argument.
Also, you can rule out any text, document, thesis, essay, book, memoirs, speech, encyclopedia or journal because...they are all quotes of someone.

SO,,, I guess, it's just going to be "what do you say" cause you cannot use any other source or its "quote mining"

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Just make an effort to verify that what you're posting is in the correct context, which isn't that complicated to do. I already provided you with straight-from-the-source proof from Colin Patterson that his speech was surreptitiously recorded, and convoluted grotesquely out of context.

 

[lasthero]

Those are variations within a species via natural selection

Really?

So this:

and this

Are both just the same species? Or do you maybe want to actually LOOK at that link before you dismiss it?

 

[EternalDragon]

Really?

So this:

and this

Are both just the same species? Or do you maybe want to actually LOOK at that link before you dismiss it?

A fish turns into a fish. That's great. But actually I don't really buy the hype.

 

[PsychoSarah]

A fish turns into a fish. That's great. But actually I don't really buy the hype.

You should at the very least be able to tell at a glance the phenotypic differences between those two species exceeds those between humans and chimpanzees by a great deal.

 

[EternalDragon]

You should at the very least be able to tell at a glance the phenotypic differences between those two species exceeds those between humans and chimpanzees by a great deal.

That is if it is true that one somehow morphed into the other. So far
that has not been established.

 

[JacksBratt]

You claimed that there were no transitional fossils when a quick Google search turns up tons of them.

Why is that?

I have said that, although I don't see it in the my quote that you copied.

Why is that?

It is due to the number of fossils of the animals that we have fossils for. There are hundreds of fossils of each of many different kinds of animals.
There should actually be a long line of gradually changing fossilized animals. Each species stage would have to exist for long long periods of time as they evolved.

Even evolutionists, who grasp the magnitude of the problem here, have created the "punctuated equilibrium" theory as an attempt to expain away this problem.

Darwin even understood the demise of his theory....

"Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. (The Origin of Species)"

About 140 years later, when Prof. Steve Jones of University College London updated the book's version, the problem still remained ...

The fossil record - in defiance of Darwin's whole idea of gradual change - often makes great leaps from one form to the next. Far from the display of intermediates to be expected from slow advance through natural selection many species appear without warning, persist in fixed form and disappear, leaving no descendants. Geology assuredly does not reveal any finely graduated organic chain, and this is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against the theory of evolution.” (Almost Like a Whale, p. 252)


Go ahead and hammer me for "quote mining" but they said what they said.

The fossil record, which was expected to be the foundation on which to support the theory (as what else do we have to prove the animals that lived on the earth in the past?) is not straight forward evidence for evolution but the subject of scientific controversy.

 

[Neogaia777]

Both Evolution could have happened, and God creating Adam could be true also...

This debate will never end: Adam evolved, or was he directly created by God?

 

[morse86]

Both Evolution could have happened, and God creating Adam could be true also...

This debate will never end: Adam evolved, or was he directly created by God?

No, evolution and the word of God are polar opposites.

God created everything. Everything. There is no "evolution" in God's creations.

1 John 1:3:
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:10:
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

Colossians 1:16:
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:


When it says God created man, that is it. Man was created by God. No evolution.

You don't see God offering salvation to the primates do you? That's because animals are not created in the image of God, we are!

Evolutionists try to deceptively hide the fact that life came from a rock. It serve no purpose to science...except for "population control", setting up the world stage for the antichrist, turning people away from God.

 

[AV1611VET]

This debate will never end: Adam evolved, or was he directly created by God?

According to Luke, the "beloved physician," Adam was created.

Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

 

[Neogaia777]

No, evolution and the word of God are polar opposites.

God created everything. Everything. There is no "evolution" in God's creations.

1 John 1:3:
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:10:
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

Colossians 1:16:
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:


When it says God created man, that is it. Man was created by God. No evolution.


Evolutionists try to deceptively hide the fact that life came from a rock. It serve no purpose to science...except for "population control", setting up the world stage for the antichrist, turning people away from God.

I disagree with you, but whatever... I believe in evolution and that God created Adam and set him apart, set him up, in a garden...

 

[Neogaia777]

According to Luke, the "beloved physician," Adam was created.

Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Evolution is a (form of) creation, an act of creating

 

[morse86]

I disagree with you, but whatever... I believe in evolution and that God created Adam and set him apart, set him up, in a garden...

So did God offer salvation to the monkeys? Were they created in the image of God? At any point, did he say this is my only begotten son?!?!?!?!?

So you are saying that God only offers salvation to man if the ape that he created evolves into man? So you think in works salvation (satanic doctrine)/predestination is correct?!?!?!? Is salvation a free gift or not!

Which of the animals did he create in his image and breath life into him????


Faith is the your belief in the unseen. You either believe what God says (which you haven't seen) OR you believe evolution (which you haven't seen). Pick one, but don't mix the two...they are polar opposites.


You need to study your bible.

 

[Neogaia777]

So did God offer salvation to the monkeys? Were they created in the image of God? At any point, did he say this is my only begotten son?!?!?!?!?

So you are saying that God only offers salvation to man if the ape that he created evolves into man? So you think in works salvation (satanic doctrine)/predestination is correct?!?!?!? Is salvation a free gift or not!

Which of the animals did he create in his image and breath life into him????


Faith is the your belief in the unseen. You either believe what God says (which you haven't seen) OR you believe evolution (which you haven't seen). Pick one, but don't mix the two...they are polar opposites.


You need to study your bible.

No, I believe evolution was happening on the rest of the earth, when Adam was created and set up in an isolated garden, I believe that we all came from Adam, and that the rest of the proto-hominid creations were destroyed, and that we are all decendants of Adam or even Noah...

You need to reconcile science with your beliefs, evolution (of other creatures) cannot be denied, but I do believe Adam was created, and that we are all his decendants

 

[Loudmouth]

Those are variations within a species via natural selection, trying hard to look like evolution.

Evidence for these claims?

 

[Loudmouth]

There should actually be a long line of gradually changing fossilized animals.

Evidence for this claim?

Please show that the rate of fossilization, survival of fossils, and the overall search of the fossil record would have produced the observations you claim.

Even evolutionists, who grasp the magnitude of the problem here, have created the "punctuated equilibrium" theory as an attempt to expain away this problem.

Yet another creationist who doesn't understand what Punctuated Equilibria is.

Darwin even understood the demise of his theory....

"Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. (The Origin of Species)"

And there is the usual dishonest quote mine. Darwin spent an entire chapter explaining why one should not see a "finely-graduated organic chain". Perhaps you should read it.

"Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record."
The Origin of Species: Chapter 9

"Those who think the natural geological record in any degree perfect, and who do not attach much weight to the facts and arguments of other kinds even in this volume, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory. For my part, following out Lyell's metaphor, I look at the natural geological record, as a history of the world imperfectly kept, and written in a changing dialect; of this history we possess the last volume alone, relating only to two or three countries. Of this volume, only here and there a short chapter has been preserved; and of each page, only here and there a few lines. Each word of the slowly-changing language, in which the history is supposed to be written, being more or less different in the interrupted succession of chapters, may represent the apparently abruptly changed forms of life, entombed in our consecutive, but widely separated formations. On this view, the difficulties above discussed are greatly diminished, or even disappear."
The Origin of Species: Chapter 9

All you are doing is parroting dishonest creationists by using their quote mines. Why don't you read the actual material, and then get back to us.

The fossil record, which was expected to be the foundation on which to support the theory (as what else do we have to prove the animals that lived on the earth in the past?) is not straight forward evidence for evolution but the subject of scientific controversy.

Genetic evidence has proven the theory of evolution beyond any reasonable doubt. Fossils are just icing on the cake.

 

[Loudmouth]

A fish turns into a fish.

"Fish" isn't the name of a species.

"Those are variations within a species via natural selection, trying hard to look like evolution."--EternalDragon