Is there any evidence for evolution?

[lesliedellow]

Like you would have the intellectual vigor to actually learn anything about it. Trolling CF doesn't make you intellectual reflective thought and diligent study do. Oh and engaged civil discourse which is something you can't be bothered with either. You wouldn't know an intellectual topic if it fell in you lap you would just discard it callously and light the flamethrower.

I wonder how many fundamentalists have read The Fundamentals? I have.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are believing in a lie. I am not an ape and neither are you. You and I were created in the image of God, unlike the animals.

I defined my understanding of "kind" in a different post.

Wrong, you have been told lies. Scientists have evidence that shows that you are an ape. You have no valid evidence to the contrary.

And I did not see it.

So if you saw two groups of animals that looked similar how would you tell if they were of the same "kind" or not. By the way, Kent Hovind came up with a test too. Sadly for him his test puts man in the "ape" category.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thank you for at least having the guts to say that you think I am wrong. Many are too cowardly to say that nowadays in the name of political correctness.

I don't merely think that you are wrong. I know that you are wrong. You can't say the same thing. To "know" something means that one can demonstrate that knowledge. All you have are beliefs.

 

[mark kennedy]

1. Etymology doesn't address the issue, which is a scientifically useful definition of "kinds" that has both explanatory and predictive power.
2. Mendelian genetics doesn't account for mutations. But you know that.

Kinds is identical in meaning for the third and final time. What's more no mendelian genetics doesn't a dress genetic mutation. It just produced two laws of science that show how life really works unlike Darwinism.

 

[Loudmouth]

If your superficial treatment of empirical details are any indication when it comes to evangelical theology you don't know much and could care less.

And another ad hominem attack.

 

[Loudmouth]

I know the New Testament testimony concerning creation and my fellow Christians have believed it for two thousand years and will till Christ returns and God does it again as promised in the Gospel.

The majority of Christian denominations accept evolution.

 

[lesliedellow]

And another ad hominem attack.

The way he hands them out, would seem to indicate that, either he has no worthwhile arguments, or he has a greatly inflated estimate of his own intellectual prowess, or both.

 

[AV1611VET]

I wonder how many fundamentalists have read The Fundamentals? I have.

TULIP?

 

[lesliedellow]

TULIP?

What about TULIP? It's an acronym; not a book or books.

 

[AV1611VET]

What about TULIP? It's an acronym; not a book or books.

Are those the fundamentals you're talking about?

 

[lesliedellow]

Are those the fundamentals you're talking about?

I am talking about the four books, which were published in the early twentieth century, from which, knowingly or not, fundamentalist Christianity takes its name.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am talking about the four books, which were published in the early twentieth century, from which, knowingly or not, fundamentalist Christianity takes its name.

No, I haven't read them.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Apparently, you don't understand what anti-intellectualism is, which is a bit ironic.

Apparently you didn't answer the question. Though changing the subject is not uncommon, to use something as paltry as accusing one of not knowing a simple word definition, is just funny.

 

[mark kennedy]

I am talking about the four books, which were published in the early twentieth century, from which, knowingly or not, fundamentalist Christianity takes its name.

There's been a couple of versions of it but I think that one was produced by Baptists. It puts a lot of emphasis on the inerrancy of Scripture. There are usually five base fundamentals.

 

[CodyFaith]

I have eyes. Every creature on earth has eyes, so that must mean we're all related evolutionary instead of just having a common creator.

I have two legs. Monkeys have two legs. Dogs have 4 legs. Cats have four legs.
So just as a dog is obviously related to a cat, I'm clearly obviously related to a monkey and/or apes. I mean, we're still built the same and all.

Humans act like animals and try to dominate each other, it's obviously a trait that we inherited from our ancestors, instead of humans acting in a morally incorrect way it's something excusable because we're all just animals deep down.

But then again, there's a reason why scripture talks about a "strong delusion" coming about in the end times. Note it doesn't say weak, it says strong.

 

[florida2]

Yes.

But if done by God-called, Spirit-filled missionaries, Shannon entropy can take a hike.

Were the people who wrote the original manuscripts, which all later versions including the KJV were based from, God-called and Spirit-filled?

 

[AV1611VET]

There's been a couple of versions of it but I think that one was produced by Baptists. It puts a lot of emphasis on the inerrancy of Scripture. There are usually five base fundamentals.

If I remember correctly, they are:

1. Verbal plenary inspiration
2. Triune Godhead
3. Virgin birth
4. Vicarious sacrifice
5. Resurrection
6. Second coming

That's pretty close.

 

[florida2]

I have eyes. Every creature on earth has eyes, so that must mean we're all related evolutionary instead of just having a common creator.

I have two legs. Monkeys have two legs. Dogs have 4 legs. Cats have four legs.
So just as a dog is obviously related to a cat, I'm clearly obviously related to a monkey and/or apes. I mean, we're still built the same and all.

Humans act like animals and try to dominate each other, it's obviously a trait that we inherited from our ancestors, instead of humans acting in a morally incorrect way it's something excusable because we're all just animals deep down.

But then again, there's a reason why scripture talks about a "strong delusion" coming about in the end times. Note it doesn't say weak, it says strong.

I just can't even begin on that post.

You do realise that there is evidence for evolution which isn't looking at stuff and saying they're similar? Genetics perhaps?

 

[AV1611VET]

Were the people who wrote the original manuscripts, which all later versions including the KJV were based from, God-called and Spirit-filled?

Let's cut the drama; the KJV came from God.

 

[florida2]

Let's cut the drama; the KJV came from God.

And so do all other versions of the Bible? Otherwise how could God allow millions of Christians around the world to use Bibles which are not from God?