• 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.

When did evolution begin?

Status
Not open for further replies.

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Really? Then provide evidence that supports your claim. I can support my claim if you demand me to. You know that I can since you have seen the evidence that supports me many times.

The problem is what do you determine as evolution? It used to be that monkeys became man. Now it is all about adaptation. There is not evidence at all that monkeys became man but there is plenty of evidence of adaptation which is what Darwin observed in finches beaks but atheistic scientists jumped on this and made a whole theory about evolution that included monkey/man scenario as a means to get God out of the picture.

They were so desperate to prove a theory as fact they invented the Piltdown Man in the 50s and claimed that it was evidence of the gaps in the fossil record. Fifty years later they admitted it was a complete hoax.
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

And I have learned that so called atheists and evolutionaries cannot answer the most basic of questions "How did life begin?" That tells me they do not have a clue about what they are claiming.
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Abiogenesis or Magical Chemical Generation is just another excuse for believing the lies of evolutionism. Evolutionists have many lies to teach our babies. Amen?
AMEN!
 
Reactions: Aman777
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,532
29,041
Pacific Northwest
✟812,661.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
What makes you so certain that it doesn't reference what we call evolution?

Because the authors of the text couldn't be talking about something which no one of the time had any knowledge. It's like expecting the writers of Genesis to be able to write about the topography of the Yukon Territory.

Divine inspiration does not mean that God gave to the writers a supernatural knowledge of a scientific process which would not even be known for many, many centuries later when it would have benefited nobody--because nobody who would have read these things in the times they were written would have been able to make that kind of connection making those points in the text entirely useless as Scripture for a pre-modern people.


They are made in "kinds", that is, in their diversity. The author does not attempt to spell out "pomegranates, apples, figs, mustard, rose bushes, tulips, wheat, rye, barley" instead the author simply says "of their kinds" that is, of the many kinds of [known] plant life, of the many kinds of things that swim, of the many different kinds of things that fly, etc. This is not about the development of thing after thing, but of the diversity and array of different sorts of things within the grouping listed, "things that creep" "beasts", etc.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I have yet to find a creationist who can correctly describe thermodynamics.

  1. Thermodynamics is a branch of physics concerned with heat and temperature and their relation to energy and work. It defines macroscopic variables, such as internal energy, entropy, and pressure, that partly describe a body of matter or radiation.
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
A monkey does not become a man.~selah

You know that and I know that but atheists and evolutionaries are convinced that he does over millions of years. I asked one atheist "How come since Darwin wrote the Origin of the Species, not one single thing has evolved?"

His reply was that you can't see it happening because it takes place over a long period of time. if that were the case, some families would have monkeys in their ancestry but to date no one has. If that were the case some families would have ancestry that was part monkey and part man because evolution doesn't happen quickly.
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Which atheists disagree on the ~4.5 billion year age of the Earth?

As one atheists said earlier I am not going to do your homework for you especially when you should know the answer.
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

So true Aman. That is why they won't allow the creation story to be explained alongside evolution as they know if that happens all their theories and baloney will go right out of the window. What that tells me is they have no faith at all in what they believe. It doesn't bother me one little bit that atheists have got nothing better to do than try and convince themselves they are right and we are wrong on OUR websites. To me it is one big laugh as they think they can convert the converted.
 
Reactions: Aman777
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

I am so impressed with what you know [sic]. You know so much you can't answer the most basic of questions such as "How did life begin?" Until you can answer that question you know nothing. zip. zilch. zero.
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

That's right Aman. They can't even answer the most basic of questions such as "How did life begin?" To give an answer would mean that they have to accept the part God played in all this and as we know, that is anathema to them.

In fact, I have this feeling they are not interested in proving anything. All they want to do is keep God out of the picture so as long as they keep dredging up red herrings to avoid reality they are happy. They insist they have mounds of evidence for their theories but they seem to fail to produce any of it. They dredge up the red herring of you haven't produced any evidence whilst they wallow in the luxury of not producing any evidence themselves.
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You do realize that there is a consensus amongst virtually every academic (christians included) involved in the field of biology that evolution is a fact.

What I do know is that I have read enough to know that if you want to keep funding coming for your pet projects you have to toe the line. If a scientist is not researching something to do with the origins of life he keeps quiet or quotes the party line so as to ensure that the funds for his research doesn't dry up.

The fact that someone says they believe in evolution does not mean they believe in evolution if they want funds for their scientific project. It is known as pragmatism. The other day I read an article about a Professor who was pulled over the coals because he said he believed in biblical creation.

That sort of thing makes me laugh as universities are supposed to places of enquiry and research and that encourage people to have an open mind and look at all aspects. Not any more. if you don't toe the official line it could mean loss of job or loss of funding. Just shows you how insecure these promoters of evolution are.
 
Upvote 0

As I was saying

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2015
1,258
200
83
Drouin, Victoria, Australia
✟2,608.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

Sorry but dinosaurs getting bigger or smaller depending on food supply is not evolution. That is adaptation. Just like me. if I consume less food I lose weight. I am still me however.

According to scripture God created everything after its own kind. Man/man. Dog/dog. Cat/cat. Tree/tree. Through the years adaptation takes place regularly but that is not evolution becuase the item concerned always stays what they are. No one changes from one thing to another so that blows the theories [sic] of evolution out of the proverbial window.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
How many times has Once given the quote claiming illusion of design? A dozen times? More?
Do you know what "illusion of design" means? It means that the object was no designed. Snowflakes have an illusion of design.
He has given you the evidence that you required many many times.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,976
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,212.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

It has also been noted that many fossils that demonstrate 'evolution' are merely the remains of the same species that died during various stages of growth, i.e. juveniles to adults.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single


Sorry, but you are using the term "red herring incorrectly". Your question is a red herring. That has been explained to you many times. The theory of evolution does not depend upon the origin of life. It is a pointless and foolish question.

And no, your side lost over 100 years ago. Your side never even got to first base while the workers for the theory of evolution hit home run after home run. Even creation "scientists" that know how to write peer reviewed papers are know that they cannot refute the theory of evolution. Science is tested in the world of peer review and creationists are so wrong that they can't get peer reviewed papers published. They had to go so far as to create make up "peer review".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single

This is just a strawman argument based on your ability to pay attention in class.

And though your claim is incredibly poorly worded, yet there is massive evidence that shows how we descended from other apes. And as soon as you learn what evidence is I will be glad to show you the evidence. It is not a difficult concept to learn. Though most creationists are terribly afraid of the concept.

And no, Piltdown man was a hoax perpetuated against evolution. It was never used as evidence since it made no sense from the start. And it was evolutionary scientists that uncovered the fraud. Creationists never had a clue.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.