What does evolution mean to you?

[lithium.]

Well I can't really say much on that subject because I don't believe in god, but seebs, smilin and Thebear seems to accept evolution or I think they do and they think Jesus died from our sins. I think that they could talk about this better than I.


P.S. is it pick on Seesaw week?

 

[Chris†opher Paul]

Originally posted by Apologist
This is theistic evolution and I find that very problematic.

Consider this from CRI's web site:

Genesis 3 unmistakably asserts that death overcame man when he transgressed God's command. Death, according to Scripture, had no hold on man until some later period following his creation. This flies directly in the face of evolutionary theory. Still, theistic evolutionists may try to skirt these passages by regarding the opening portion of Genesis as non-historical. But such recourse can only lead them to even more disastrous avenues. Theistic evolutionists can allegorize Genesis as much as they want, but to do so, they have to contend against Scripture itself. Paul, in such passages as Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15, clearly treats the Genesis account in historical terms and he speaks of human death as God's judgment on sin. It was for this very reason -- to answer for God's punishment for our sin -- that Christ died. This is the very heart of the Gospel. Quite frankly, Theistic Evolution, in my opinion, is a contradiction in terms, somewhat like talking about burning snowflakes.

But if human death were not God's judgment on sin, as theistic evolutionists would have to maintain, what then did Christ die for? Those clinging to evolutionary dogma would have to admit that Jesus lied when He claimed to die for our sins. Consequently, the atonement is robbed of all meaning, while the Gospel is hollowed to an empty shell. In their attempt to fuse evolutionary theory with Scripture, theistic evolutionists only wind up perverting God's Good News into no news, as we remain dead in our sins.

Do you think this death was physical death? There is a lot of Scripture pointing it out as spiritual death.

 

[sulphur]

more typos

 

[pinkangel]

Seesaw I dont think anyones trying to get at you its just peoples views and opinons I certainly mean you no offense when I write my views on here

 

[sulphur]

Apologist,your comments about people clinging to evolutionary dogma show your total ignorance about the concept of evolution.

 

[EPHRIAM777]

Originally posted by Neo

• 
  [*]John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time."
  [*]Exodus 33:20 "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live."
  [*]I John 4:12 "No man hath seen God at any time."
  
  
  Eph says..
  
  "I know why you stay up all night at your computer Neo"....
  
  Hey Neo...you should do a Bible word study and find out just what "The Matrix" is..
  
  In the literal Greek...It reads..No one has seen the fullness of God...
  
  We can see a portion of what God is..thru Jesus Christ....but thats not the entire picture of what God is...
  
  Moses was allowed to look at God's "rear end" as he passed by on the Mt...That also wasn't the entire picture..! see EX 33:20:23...God says "my back parts" BUT that is the KJV cleaning up what God actually said in the Hebrew..!
  
  ...Because everyone knows God would never say things like that...There are unattended little children running around here on this forum..and their eyes and ears might melt...if they knew what God really said...!
  
  So.....Neo since I'm now on constant "thin ice" review with some of the Monitors..I won't post what GOD actually said in the Hebrew because I'll get the boot for it...!

 

[Chris†opher Paul]

I won't post what GOD actually said in the Hebrew because I'll get the boot for it...!

You cant quote Scripture?

 

[EPHRIAM777]

Originally posted by s0uljah
You cant quote Scripture?

Eph writes...

I can...but not the way God said it...!

 

[Chris†opher Paul]

Originally posted by EPHRIAM777

Originally posted by s0uljah
You cant quote Scripture?

Eph writes...

I can...but not the way God said it...!

 

[EPHRIAM777]

Originally posted by seesaw
Well I can't really say much on that subject because I don't believe in god, but seebs, smilin and Thebear seems to accept evolution or I think they do and they think Jesus died from our sins. I think that they could talk about this better than I.


Eph writes...

ANYONE...who thinks EVO...is based on "science"...Might also think Star Trek is "science".....!

Let me say right up front....Science FICTION..isn't science...and EVO isn't science...it's fiction...!

 

[sulphur]

I saw a alien two years ago and there three witnesses.Nobody believed me and I don't tell lies

 

[EPHRIAM777]

Originally posted by s0uljah



Eph says...

I was warned not to use "adult" type language on this forum...( not curse words mind you..just PROPER adult words for certain "reproductive body parts"

GOD at times uses some "juicey" words...That the English translators of the KJV...decided to clean up...

Thus you end up with legalistic people taught it's not Christian..to use certain words...that GOD had no trouble using..!

...Of course around here I would never want to cause any babes in Christ to stumble...So for their sake...I agreed...( although I'll admit it is amazing to see how OLD some of those babes are )...!

 

[lithium.]

Originally posted by EPHRIAM777

Originally posted by seesaw
Well I can't really say much on that subject because I don't believe in god, but seebs, smilin and Thebear seems to accept evolution or I think they do and they think Jesus died from our sins. I think that they could talk about this better than I.


Eph writes...

ANYONE...who thinks EVO...is based on "science"...Might also think Star Trek is "science".....!

Let me say right up front....Science FICTION..isn't science...and EVO isn't science...it's fiction...!

That is your opinion, but you are completely wrong. You seem to talk about evolution a lot, but it looks like you have never studied it. Evolution is mainstream science.

 

[lithium.]

Originally posted by sulphur
I saw a alien two years ago and there three witnesses.Nobody believed me and I don't tell lies

I thought that I seen a UFO a few years ago but no one believed me.

 

[EPHRIAM777]

Originally posted by sulphur
I saw a alien two years ago and there three witnesses.Nobody believed me and I don't tell lies

Eph chuckles...

Of course that statement alone shows some BIG holes...in it...!

Why did you wait 2 yrs to tell us about it now...?

 

[lithium.]

Please can you use the quote tool your posting style is really confussing?

 

[EPHRIAM777]

Originally posted by seesaw [/i]

That is your opinion, but you are completely wrong. You seem to talk about evolution a lot, but it looks like you have never studied it. Evolution is mainstream science.

Eph says...

Seesaw...

Defend this stuff if you want...But you don't even realise your defending something that is based on MANY different subjects...that are AGREED upon by the followers of this subject..!

It's a shame that you can't even SEE what I'm trying to tell you...! Because I have studied it...

The entire subject of EVO stands or falls...on there being "long slow gradual changes over vast amounts of time"...In order for things to evolve..!

So in order to back it up..they need "other" sciences to MATCH what each say...But the entire thing is like a "house of cards"...!

Knock one down and they ALL fall...!

There was no long slow gradual change with this planet...things didn't always decay at the same rate...thus Carbon 14 for example is a flawed system of dating..!

So...how did things Evolve if there wasn't a VAST amount of time...for slow gradual changes to occur..?

Do you see how ALL of it is interlocked yet..?

Evo is based on that...So scientists come up with dating systems that START out saying the world is very old...and then seek to prove it...!

A house of cards...thats all it is...ALL built on FAITH in their dating systems being right...! BUT they use these systems to only prove what they already believe..!

So they use fossils to date strata...and the strata to date the fossils..they claim "layers" of snow are yrs...and layers of strata are yrs...When in fact their proof for all this...is only based what they ALREADY "believe" in...!

Remember this....Someone made the world...OR the world made itself...The universe is governed by certian laws..Inertia...gravity...thermodynamics..where did they come from or evolve from..? where does energy come from..?

The Geologic column that Charles Lyle made is only found in textbooks...It's never been found in the earth..or an actual dig...!

 

[Jerry Smith]

Ephraim777,

You are very opinionated. Amongst all the handwaving in your various posts, however, there are a few things that you believe that are just false - not a matter of opinion. For instance:

Evo is based on that...So scientists come up with dating systems that START out saying the world is very old...and then seek to prove it...!

The fact is that this is false. Lyell demonstrated that the earth was very old prior to Darwin. Many Christian geologists had begun thinking of the earth as very old long before Darwin's theory was even conceived.

Fast forward to the late 19th century, after Darwin. While there was significant agreement that the earth was old, scientists didn't have any good measurements of how old. Despite the fact that evolution required millions of years, some scientists, like Kelvin, proposed models for the age of the earth in the hundreds of thousands of years - knowing that if their models were correct that evolution would be falsified.

Both of your premises are falsified. The earth's great age was postulated before Darwin: therefore it could not have been chosen as an assumption to support evolution. Secondly, scientists did not avoid models that showed an age of the earth too young for evolution just to preserve the theory even when they had an opportunity to.

The fact is that radiometric dating has some limitations, but is on the whole a very reliable method for measuring the age of earth's features, including its fossil life forms! Not only does radiometric dating give consistent results when various isotopes with different decay rates are used (with the few exceptions being an excellent means of identifying the occasional inaccurate results), but it is consistent with all of the other lines of evidence.

Like this point, all of the points that creationist criticisms of evolution really depend on - turn out to be erroneous!

 

[lithium.]

Defend this stuff if you want...But you don't even realise your defending something that is based on MANY different subjects...that are AGREED upon by the followers of this subject..!

Huh?

t's a shame that you can't even SEE what I'm trying to tell you...! Because I have studied it..

Well i'm not seeing what you are telling me. Well you might have studied it but I don't think you understand it.

The entire subject of EVO stands or falls...on there being "long slow gradual changes over vast amounts of time"...In order for things to evolve..!

So?

So in order to back it up..they need "other" sciences to MATCH what each say...But the entire thing is like a "house of cards"...!

I'm still not really following you.

Knock one down and they ALL fall...!

LOL huh?

There was no long slow gradual change with this planet...things didn't always decay at the same rate...thus Carbon 14 for example is a flawed system of dating..!

Really? So the planet didn't evolve?

Do you see how ALL of it is interlocked yet..?

No... I'm confussed.

So...how did things Evolve if there wasn't a VAST amount of time...for slow gradual changes to occur..?

So the earth hasn't been around for billions of years? And if it hasn't why does all the evidence show that it has?

Evo is based on that...So scientists come up with dating systems that START out saying the world is very old...and then seek to prove it...!

If the universe looks billions of years old then maybe it is billions of years old. But you are saying it's not and that we are all being lied to.

A house of cards...thats all it is...ALL built on FAITH in their dating systems being right...! BUT they use these systems to only prove what they already believe..!

Nope the evidence proves that dating methods or "systems" are right.

So they use fossils to date strata...and the strata to date the fossils..they claim "layers" of snow are yrs...and layers of strata are yrs...When in fact their proof for all this...is only based what they ALREADY "believe" in...!

I'm confussed again. :hitting head againt wall:

Remember this....Someone made the world...OR the world made itself...The universe is governed by certian laws..Inertia...gravity...thermodynamics..where did they come from or evolve from..? where does energy come from..?

What energy?

The Geologic column that Charles Lyle made is only found in textbooks...It's never been found in the earth..or an actual dig...!

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geocolumn/ (I think that is the right link)

 

[westwitch]

evolution is change. we can study the changes in different species, and the creation of new species. as environments and situations change, species adapt. also, new ones are formed, like new breeds of animals. i don't think it makes a huge impact but subtle change..