Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The ToE, air tight buddy. Maybe you’re unaware?
If you have a question, you should ask.
and evolution lack any evidence to support the claim that one creature can evolve into another one.
its like saying that a car with small changes over time will evolve into a space shuttle.
yep. the point is that they didnt evolved from each other.
If one was told that alchemy was established science throughout high school, he would accept it as fact. If he went on to study alchemy in college he may come up with some pomposity like, "Those who reject alchemy do not understand alchemy." It would be the same with those who study any false paradigm.
Anyone who studies the Scriptures would likely agree that Jesus was a creationist. As evidence of this, He made multiple references to the early chapters of Genesis, and never refuted a word of it. So the question then is where do you put your faith; on the word of God or the theories of man?
It accounts for the origins of species. It accounts for the origins of bio-diversity.Realize, of course, that evolution cannot account for the origination of anything,
only changes which occurred after life originated
The Bible not only details the how of creation, but the why as well.
Any who believes in evolution and the Scriptures has a complete understanding of neither.
They are mutually exclusive.
The Bible teaches us that sin and death came into the world through one man; Adam.
The more pompous among us consider the belief in creation as ignorance.
Science tells us that Jesus could not have been resurrected. If you believe science in that regard you are not enlightened, only condemned.
Faith is the belief in things unproven.
If you reject God when He is unproven He will reject you when He is proven.
Who, then, is the fool; the one who resides with God in Heaven or the lost soul in Hell?
Therefore, 93 percent of the members of the National Academy of Sciences are fools.
i just use evolutionery logic. if according to evolution small steps+time= big step.
then small steps in a car (something that we can observe like a rust or color change because the sun)+time= airplane.
the same logic, the same (wrong) conclusion.
actually, even if we assume that we have a car that is able to reproduce like a living thing, it will not evolve into an airplane even by a trillion years.
really? You honestly believe there is no qualitative difference between evolution the process and evolution the theory? Interesting, you need to learn something about the theory of evolution before responding to me.
You give me a research article of ToE, I will show you the holes in it.
The weekend is over and I am tired of your games so I am on to something worthwhile. My point from the beginning to this point in time is and has been that people who are zealous about a topic do not take the time to listen to others that they deem wrong no matter what they believe. The discussion is so emotionally charged that no real communication can happen. In fact, that is why I refuse to speak about what I believe on the topic. My refusal to express what I know and believe is one reason I know you all are not listening because a couple of the posts on this thread presume to know what I believe when I refuse to speak about what I believe because of the emotionally charged non listening nature of many here.
The truly funny thing is that this lack of listening thus lack of communication goes for everyone who is zealous about a topic, iow's it's human nature. Many of the people here who have been doing this to me and others are the same people who accuse creationists of doing similar things....lol. Both groups do it which insures no communication or at least meaningful communication will ever happen. You all see it in others but refuse to open your eyes to you doing it yourselves.
Now to further illustrate my point, one post on this topic commented about not being able to understand my posts because there was nothing in it to argue about. See, zealots seek to argue and disagree rather than listen and exchange ideas and opinions in a meaningful way. So now you have been given two direct examples of what I am talking about being evidenced in this thread. I tried years ago to communicate on the topic of origins and it went very much like this thread has. I say something painfully benign only to be insulted and attacked for beliefs that I never said I had and quite frankly most of the "invented" beliefs are insulting to what I really do believe. Today, I will occasionally go to a thread like this with a benign comment and test the waters so to speak and see if anything has changed, see if it is possible to have meaningful communication. As you all have demonstrated, that still isn't possible on this topic which is why I am taking my leave.
So now, the floor is yours to prove me right once again by attacking me, insulting me, telling me you can't follow what I said, etc. If nothing else it has been entertaining to see you trip over yourselves to prove me right about how zealots argue on these boards. Enjoy your bashing of one another and your prideful displays of arrogance and disrespect for others.
The study is irrelevant. The basis of proving a point is the logic behind it. That's what I am addressing. So:
"So if the evolutionist had a better understanding of the bible/God/Creation they would be more likely to accept it."
Must be true as well for the initial logic to be correct.
Can you prove He does not?
To those who understand evolution, they know holes of the theory are EVERYWHERE. They accepted it by faith, because there is no alternative if they do not accept God.
We know these dates from Josephus, most notably. Did it occur to you that Josephus may be in error about the dates? I don't recall any mention of calendars in the Gospels.
Also, the Bible was written in a different language in a different time. The insects and animals that were known in the region and would be applicable to the instructions given may not be what is in existence now. It is clear that their word for foul meant winged creatures.
Every atheist posts the same apparent "contradictions" from the same websites. Nothing new here.
Except people like Francis Collins, who's a world reknown evolutionary biologist and devout christian.
It seems your claims to not match the evidence of reality. If your claim is correct, then people like Francis Collins should not exist.
And, you should add the Pop into the list.
And you should rephrase your claim, since clearly your claim does not match the evidence of reality.
I repeat: if your claim is correct, then people like Francis Collins (and the pope, and the rest of the vatican and the majority of christians) should not exist.
So, are you going to address this point?
Or will you rather, as usual, ignore it and simply repeat your claim in a couple of posts?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?