Your Thoughts on Creation & Evolution

[Bungle_Bear]

The intelligence of a child cannot be changed externally but ONLY by inheritance from it's parents. The ability to learn is inherited, thus one's intelligence is inherited. The ToE relates to physical attributes and NOT to the invisible intelligence of Humans.

Let's look at how this would play out. You inherit your intelligence from your parents. According to you, therefore, it is impossible for intelligence to increase and everyone would have the same (average?) intelligence as their parents.

Please explain why Albert Einstein appears to have been more intelligent than his parents. Was he descended from lines of geniuses who chose to hide their intelligence?

 

[Aman777]

Oh, it's clearly far more than that.Just our discussions of the origins of farming and musical instruments shows that you immediately reject findings in science/history that contradict your views.
You can't simultaneously claim everything agrees with you and reject everything that doesn't. That's a logical contradiction.
Only if you have something more to offer than unsupported claims and Bible quotes.Oh and no PRATTs either. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

What's a PRATT?

 

[Aman777]

If all you've got left is to repeatedly plead ignorance about what my position is, when I have already been very specific, it's quite clear that your argument has no merit. I accept your tacit admission that you are wrong, because that's as close as anyone will get to an actual one from you.

Why are you being so hateful? Have I struck a nerve? Are you mad because you cannot refute God's Holy Word? Of course you are. I'm sorry for your frustration.

 

[Aman777]

Last question: Other than you, is there anyone you would accept as the arbiter of that agreement?

Anyone with a fourth grade reading level could recognize the Truth since my critics have NOTHING to offer. If they do, I wish they would go ahead and post it...so I could have something to refute.

 

[Aman777]

Would you care to address what I actually wrote? If not, the conclusion is that you cannot support your argument. Honesty or lies? Which will you choose?

I answered but you didn't like my answer. Here it is again. Try to keep up.

Aman777 said: ↑
Agnostics have nothing to lose by lying.

 

[pitabread]

What's a PRATT?

Point Refuted A Thousand Times.

Because creationist arguments tend to be so repetitive, there's an entire site dedicated to responses: An Index to Creationist Claims

If you plan to recycle any of the aforementioned arguments, I'll just refer you to the above site.

 

[Aman777]

I'm sorry, I see no scientific facts here.

Please show me where it was recently discovered to be scientific fact that Humans once interbreed with the sons of God, and that the intelligence of modern humans is not caused by DNA/evolution/anything explainable by science.

Sure. Denisovans married and produced children with people of a younger species namely, Neanderthal. It didn't change those prehistoric people (sons of God) into Humans because ONLY the descendants of Adam are Humans. What did happen was that chromosome 2 fusion happened with the children, demonstrating what happens when an archaic species produces offspring with a newer species.

Later, some 11k years ago, the most archaic group of Humans (Noah's grandsons) married and produced children with the prehistoric people (sons of God) ( a younger species) in Northern Mesopotamia. Genesis 6:4 Today's Humans are the descendants of Adam AND the prehistoric people Noah's grandsons married. Today, some 7.7 Billion living Humans have the same chromosome 2 fusion which happened earlier with Denisovans and Neanderthal. Than's God's Truth which agrees with Science and Genetics. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

This is just wrong. Evolution can result in behaviour patterns and other non-physical attributes perfectly easily. beavers that have been raised in captivity still have the instinct to act out the behaviours they'd use to build dams, even if they've never been taught and never seen a beaver dam. How do you explain this?

It's called instinct or pre-progamming. NOTHING which had it's origin in WATER can evolve Human intelligence (the Ability to know both good and evil). ONLY God and Adam's descendants have this ability. Genesis 3:22

 

[Aman777]

Let's look at how this would play out. You inherit your intelligence from your parents. According to you, therefore, it is impossible for intelligence to increase and everyone would have the same (average?) intelligence as their parents.

Please explain why Albert Einstein appears to have been more intelligent than his parents. Was he descended from lines of geniuses who chose to hide their intelligence?

According to you, Einstein's children would have more intelligence than he did. This is FALSE since the ability to know both good and evil is the same with every Human unless there is a mental problem. It's perfectly normal for a child of someone with an advanced intelligence to be endowed with normal intelligence.

 

[Aman777]

Point Refuted A Thousand Times.

Prove it IF you can. i don't think you can. Fool me and post a single issue where you have refuted (proven wrong) ANY of my views. Waiting............

 

[pitabread]

Prove it IF you can. i don't think you can. Fool me and post a single issue where you have refuted (proven wrong) ANY of my views. Waiting............

Huh? I think you're confused.

You said, "The ToE is not true to Scripture, science, history, genetics nor math. Would you like to discuss the details?"

I said sure, as long as it doesn't involve a bunch of unsupported claims, random Bible quotes and PRATTs.

But if you're just trying to once again preemptively shift the burden of proof then clearly any discussion is moot. You still haven't learned how these discussions/debates work.

 

[Aman777]

Huh? I think you're confused.

You said, "The ToE is not true to Scripture, science, history, genetics nor math. Would you like to discuss the details?"

I said sure, as long as it doesn't involve a bunch of unsupported claims, random Bible quotes and PRATTs.

But if you're just trying to once again preemptively shift the burden of proof then clearly any discussion is moot. You still haven't learned how these discussions/debates work.

Wonderful. Pick any one of these and refute it:

1. Genesis 1:21 shows that every living creature that moveth was made from water on the 5th Day. Science recently discovered the same. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/s...-ancestor.html Jul 25, 2016

2. Genesis 2:4 shows that the big bang was on the 3rd Day and Genesis 1:16 shows that it was the 4th Day before the first Stars were made. Science recently discovered the same. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/...-born-big-bang Feb 28, 2018 - The first stars lit the cosmos by 180 million years after the Big Bang,

3. Chromosone 2 fusion shows that Adam, the first Human was first made, long before plants, herbs, rain, trees, or any prehistoric person. Genesis 2:4-7

 

[pitabread]

Wonderful. Pick any one of these and refute it:

It's just a combination of weak post-hoc reasoning (with obvious confirmation bias) based on questionable Biblical interpretation (such as ignoring the fact that the Bible describes plants as being the first living things created) and continuous attempts to shift the burden of proof.

We've been through all of this before.

Is this really the extent of your ability to try to argue for something?

 

[Aman777]

It's just a combination of weak post-hoc reasoning (with obvious confirmation bias) based on questionable Biblical interpretation (such as ignoring the fact that the Bible describes plants as being the first living things created) and continuous attempts to shift the burden of proof.

We've been through all of this before.

Is this really the extent of your ability to try to argue for something?

Excuses, excuses, all I get are excuses.

The Bible clearly states that Adam, the first Human, was formed from the dust of the ground, on the 3rd Day BEFORE plants, herbs and rain. Genesis 2:4-7

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Anyone with a fourth grade reading level could recognize the Truth since my critics have NOTHING to offer. If they do, I wish they would go ahead and post it...so I could have something to refute.

So you'll accept anyone with a fourth grade or higher reading level?

Great, now we've established that let me refute you: there is no his/their/its in Hebrew.

Have your answers been truthful, or will you demonstrate, yet again, your shameless dishonesty?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

According to you, Einstein's children would have more intelligence than he did. This is FALSE since the ability to know both good and evil is the same with every Human unless there is a mental problem. It's perfectly normal for a child of someone with an advanced intelligence to be endowed with normal intelligence.

You haven't addressed my post, and you've misrepresented what I said. That's dishonest and against forum rules.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I answered but you didn't like my answer. Here it is again. Try to keep up.

Aman777 said: ↑
Agnostics have nothing to lose by lying.

How is that a valid response to my post "If you'd really looked up the original Hebrew you'd know that there is no his/their/its. Feel free to use your extensive research to show I'm wrong"?

One honest answer is all I'm after. All you give is evasion and dishonesty. Why?

 

[Aman777]

So you'll accept anyone with a fourth grade or higher reading level?

Great, now we've established that let me refute you: there is no his/their/its in Hebrew.

Have your answers been truthful, or will you demonstrate, yet again, your shameless dishonesty?

I know but Christians who have been born again Spiritually by God the Trinity can understand the difference between God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Their speaks of the Trinity and His speaks of the kind which Jesus made from the dust of the ground. God also tells us that those who have NOT been born again Spiritually cannot understand that which is Spiritual. Have you been born again Spiritually?

 

[Aman777]

How is that a valid response to my post "If you'd really looked up the original Hebrew you'd know that there is no his/their/its. Feel free to use your extensive research to show I'm wrong"?

One honest answer is all I'm after. All you give is evasion and dishonesty. Why?

Could it be that you are trying to understand that which is concealed from you?

Pro 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

 

[pitabread]

Excuses, excuses, all I get are excuses.

Like I said, we've been through all of this before. All you do is regurgitate the same stuff.

When people back you into a corner, you just resort to the same evasive tactics: claiming people don't understand, shifting the burden of proof, or issuing more unsupported claims.

I'm trying to challenge you to do better.

The Bible clearly states that Adam, the first Human, was formed from the dust of the ground, on the 3rd Day BEFORE plants, herbs and rain. Genesis 2:4-7

Which further contradicts the claim that science lines up with the Bible re: the first life (not to mention the first humans). Which further demonstrates that your claims of agreement of your interpretation of the Bible and science, history, genetics, etc, is false.

Now you're going to claim an alternative Biblical interpretation based on the wholly unsupported claim that the first humans were made on some alternative world.

And round 'n round we go.

Do you have anything different or interesting to say? Or are you going to keep going in circles?