mix and match.......

[BigJon]

Its evident that some people dont get it,

Evolution when first concepted, and the main points which are so called proven today are still mixed with a large number of theories, these theories are aimed at explaining the beginning of the earth in a form that deletes God from the picture.

Why would any one want to delete God from this?

Simple, If God created the earth and He created everything thereon, then He undoubtably created you. If He created you then your His creation, thus giving Him ownership over you. If He owns you, then its safe to say He has every right to tell you what to do.

#1 rule of sin nature = Rebellion

Human nature is that "we do what we want to do" (which is the "creed" of all satinist) so there for instead of accepting God as sole owner, we tend to try to hide that, we come up with ways in which He is not our master. Hence the theory of evolution and such non-sense.

Now for all the "christians" out there who believe evolution and/or mix evolution with God's creation....

By doin this its a wishy washy luke warm way of living for God.

The only reason I see for anyone doing this is to delete God except for where you want Him. In other words you say (by your actions / beliefs) "God doesnt have sole ownership of my life, however I reserve the right to plug him in when i need him / want him. I dont want to live out right for him, but i will accept Him and His way when needed, (to get to heaven and such times where you desperately need him).

REV 3:16 "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by BigJon
Its evident that some people dont get it,

Evolution when first concepted, and the main points which are so called proven today are still mixed with a large number of theories, these theories are aimed at explaining the beginning of the earth in a form that deletes God from the picture.

For the umpteenth zillionth time, evolution is the scientific theory to explain the origins of the observed diversity of living species on the planet Earth.

The only people who "mix it with a large number of theories" are those who need an easier straw man to attack.

Since the first assertion in your post is false, that renders the rest of your post simply moot.

 

[BigJon]

I wouldn't expect anyone to admit there wrong.

And yes evolution is was and will forever be about deleting God.

People dont admit when there wrong, 99% of all convicted felons are innocent, the other 1% is dead.

 

[Satoshi]

Originally posted by BigJon
I wouldn't expect anyone to admit there wrong.

Well, given that you're the one who's obviously mistaken, it just doesn't make much sense for LiveFreeOrDie to admit that he or she is wrong.

And yes evolution is was and will forever be about deleting God.

Repeating a lie doesn't make it any more true, Goebbels notwithstanding.

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

(deleted)

 

[Caedmon]

Originally posted by BigJon
Its[sic] evident that some people dont[sic] get it,

Evolution when first concepted, and the main points which are so called proven today are still mixed with a large number of theories, these theories are aimed at explaining the beginning of the earth in a form that deletes God from the picture.

Please provide a brief description of the major scientific theories you believe are associated with evolution.

Why would any one want to delete God from this?

How does believing in evolution "delete God"?

Simple, If God created the earth and He created everything thereon, then He undoubtably[sic] created you. If He created you then your[sic] His creation, thus giving Him ownership over you. If He owns you, then its[sic] safe to say He has every right to tell you what to do.

God only owns the Elect, as they were bought with a price. God cannot tell an "unsaved" person what to do, because that person will not hear Him.

#1 rule of sin nature = Rebellion

Actually, I believe the number one aspect of the "sin[ful] nature" is to gratify the sinful desires of the flesh, whether that manifests itself as pride, vengeance, greed, deceit, etc.

Human nature is that "we do what we want to do" (which is the "creed" of all satinist[sic]) so there for[sic] instead of accepting God as sole owner, we tend to try to hide that, we come up with ways in which He is not our master. Hence the theory of evolution and such non-sense.

I don't believe that most evolution scientists have a latent or subconscious agenda to "hide" God.

Now for all the "christians" out there who believe evolution and/or mix evolution with God's creation....

By doin[sic] this its[sic] a wishy washy luke warm way of living for God.

The only reason I see for anyone doing this is to delete God except for where you want Him. In other words you say (by your actions / beliefs) "God doesnt[sic] have sole ownership of my life, however I reserve the right to plug him in when i need him / want him. I dont[sic] want to live out right for him, but i will accept Him and His way when needed, (to get to heaven and such times where you desperately need him).

REV 3:16 "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."

By putting quotes around the word Christian, are you implying that any alleged Christian that believes in evolution is not really a Christian? Are you also implying that any Christian that believes in evolution is morally deficient or doesn't exhibit obedience toward God? How can a scientific theoretical preference affect a person's spiritual condition? How does believing in evolution deteriorate one's daily walk with Christ in respect to overcoming sin?

 

[chickenman]

bigjon, your assumptions about human nature are incredibly naive. If you want to think that evolution is primarily about removing god from the picture then you go ahead, but I don't think you have any way to back up that ridiculous claim.

 

[theyre here]

Originally posted by BigJon
Evolution when first concepted, and the main points which are so called proven today are still mixed with a large number of theories, these theories are aimed at explaining the beginning of the earth

This is a lie. I'm sure you have been told, over, and over, and over, and over again that evolution does not describe the origin of the earth. Other sciences focus on that branch of study.

Why would any one want to delete God from this?

Why do you think it does? If one believes in God, and observes the overwhelming evidence for a progression of species adaptations -- one might consider evolution was the tool of their God.

Human nature is that "we do what we want to do" (which is the "creed" of all satinist)

So says you. I've experienced otherwise. Anyone living in NYC in September of 2001 (I for one) will have a new outlook on human nature. One that does not include your ideas.

 

[tycho]

Here's a lively one! BigJon incorrectly defines evolution, incorrectly states its purpose, and then adamantly refuses to acknowledge that he might be even slightly off the mark on this. Fortunately, he's good enough to tell us "evilutionists" that we're like criminals since we don't ever admit we're wrong. Or am I reading too much into your posts, BigJon?

"It takes a big man to cry, but it takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man." -Deep Thoughts, Jack Handy

 

[theyre here]

Originally posted by BigJon

Now for all the "christians" out there who believe evolution and/or mix evolution with God's creation....

Would this have been your response to people who believed Galileo Galilei in 1616? You do remember he was called before the Inquisition, tried and convicted of proclaiming a doctrine contrary to religious doctrine, and sentanced to house arrest, under which he remained for the last decade of his life.
As we know, the sun does not revolve around the earth. (It took "the Church" over 500 years to exonerate Galileo.)


And, we know evolution describes the diversity of species on the earth.

Neither disprove God, unless of course, your faith is questionable to begin with.

 

[randman]

I like the way evolutionists like to convinietly separate the origin of the first cell from theier theory. When I was growing up, it was rightly taught as part and parcel of the overall theory of evolution, and that it was one of the areas of contention though they thought at that time, they were close to producing it in a lab.
It's all BS.
These evolutionists remind me of a famous person who disputed the meaning of what "is" is.

 

[theyre here]

Randman...

Sorry, but that is the way it is. Cellular Bilology, and related sciences, tackle the task of understanding how life sprang forth. While evolution builds from there, it does not attempt to define the "how" of the beginning, instead, evolution tackles the "how" of what happened after that.

Similarly, cosmology attempts to understand the "how" of the universe, while astronomy studies what we can currently observe. Astronomy relies on cosmology for a basis, but does not attempt to define the origins of the stars.

Within high school science, several fields are often meshed into one (for simplicity of teaching several subjects within a finite time period) and it can confuse the issue. In my high school physics class, we covered cosmology and astronomy, but today, I don't confuse those with physics.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Bigjon, you are certainly free to believe what you want about God, the universe and mans' place in it. There are many people in this forum who accept evolutionary theory as reality and yet still believe in God. I am one of them. Now, you have made judgemental statements regarding the salvation of people who believe in God and evolution at the same time. Well, I for one forgive you for that.

When it comes to picking and choosing. You must have some faith in the validity of some science. Yet you reject quite a lot of science at the same time. Based on what exaclty?

When forensic scientists look at minute details at a crime scene - in hopes of catching a murderer - they are employing the exact same logic, and in some cases similar techniques,that are used to bolster evolutionary theory. How one rely on science to catch a killer, but reject the same science when it comes to investigating our origins? I have not even mentioned that some of the same technology that goes into making our communication on this forum possible is employed in the instrumentation used for analytical proceedures. So I ask you, where exactly is the line where science becomes a lie and scientists beome liars.

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Originally posted by randman
I like the way evolutionists like to convinietly separate the origin of the first cell from theier theory.

If you want to critique scientific theories, randman, then you need to critique the theories as they are actually understood by scientists and not your misinterpretations of them. I'm sorry this is "inconvenient" for you, but science is about truth and not convenience.

When I was growing up, it was rightly taught as part and parcel of the overall theory of evolution, and that it was one of the areas of contention though they thought at that time, they were close to producing it in a lab.

Well if you were taught it, randman, then it must be true!

It's all BS.

BS = Brilliant Science?

These evolutionists remind me of a famous person who disputed the meaning of what "is" is.

Tip to randman: This particular rebuttal loses much of its rhetorical force when it's not directed at right-wing fundies with a deep-seated dislike for Mr. Clinton.

Of course it also loses much of its force when it's used incorrectly, but I can't help you with that.

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolution when first concepted, and the main points which are so called proven today are still mixed with a large number of theories, these theories are aimed at explaining the beginning of the earth in a form that deletes God from the picture.

Yup -- and replaces Him with Mother Nature.

 

[MoonLancer]

Yup -- and replaces Him with Mother Nature.

Your own God isn't good enough, You need to assign gods even to scientists and atheists.

Yup its definitely what you say.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Urgh. 2002? Really?

 

[AV1611VET]

Urgh. 2002? Really?

Yup -- believe it or not, this stuff was an issue back then too.

 

[AV1611VET]

<staff edit>.

Is this a product of creationist upbringing as well?

Do you just 'feel pity' for these guys and hope they'll manage to 'dump creationism and get on with their lives'?

Note: You do know what this is a picture of, don't you?

 

[Cabal]

Is this a product of creationist upbringing as well?

Do you just 'feel pity' for these guys and hope they'll manage to 'dump creationism and get on with their lives'?

Yes, if they are fundamentalist creationists.

Note: You do know what this is a picture of, don't you?

An irrelevance to the topic?