Evolution My ToE

[SkepticThinker]

Not like I would expect you to be able to confirm or deny inspiration.

That reminds me, one trick of evos (and Satan) is to accuse others of what they themselves are guilty of.
It may be hard to face, but you have failed repeatedly to support the same nature in the past that you fanatically insist on using in modeling the past. That makes any claims based on this a denial of anything beyond the recent past.
Shoe, meet foot.

Try to get a grip. What posters have suggested is that most scientists in origins fields would not be knowingly involved. (like useful idiots). Like actors, they more or less just memorize the lines given to them. I happen to know the writer.

Your problem with choosing to believe lies on your end. Since you do not believe God, Scripture, the apostles, or prophets or history, or Believers, I would be quite concerned if you believed me.

NOPE.

You're the one claiming Last Thursdayism with your "different state" past hypothesis. You know, the one you've repeatedly failed to demonstrate? That one.
You're the one making claims that don't conform to the evidence.
Nice try, but no cigar.

 

[SkepticThinker]

? Why would I deny post flood man? Of course we evolved a lot adapting to the new nature and world! (that being said, science can't tell a post flood human from a monkey/ape skull!)

There could have been little 'Lucys' mucking around the garden of Eden, and chatting with Adam.

I don't know why you would either.
But you did.


"The fact that man and most animals could not leave fossil remains in the former nature supports creation as decribed in the bible and the fossil record."
Your words.
Your assertion.
Your failure to back up your claims.
Any of them.
Ever.

 

[dad]

NOPE.

You're the one claiming Last Thursdayism with your "different state" past hypothesis.

I point out what we do know and what we do not. You deny reality, history and Scripture records. Why do you deny the records? If you had proof that nature was the same we could understand your last Thursdayism. As it stand you engage in it for NO reason.

 

[dad]

I don't know why you would either.
But you did.


"The fact that man and most animals could not leave fossil remains in the former nature supports creation as decribed in the bible and the fossil record."
Your words.
Your assertion.

Since the record of that time (the only record man has) says man and animals were created about the same time, we know they were here. The fact that they did not make it into the fossil record is evidence that they could not leave remains!

Since you cannot deny this record with any proof or support or science whatsoever, you lose.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I point out what we do know and what we do not. You deny reality, history and Scripture records. Why do you deny the records? If you had proof that nature was the same we could understand your last Thursdayism. As it stand you engage in it for NO reason.

LOL Now who's projecting?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Since the record of that time (the only record man has) says man and animals were created about the same time, we know they were here. The fact that they did not make it into the fossil record is evidence that they could not leave remains!

Since you cannot deny this record with any proof or support or science whatsoever, you lose.

I can deny the "record" you speak of because you haven't demonstrated it to be true.

The evidence we have from multiple fields of science show that man and animals were NOT "created about the same time."

Human beings are in the fossil record, so I don't know what you are talking about. You deny reality when you say that, "the fact that man and most animals could not leave fossil remains in the former nature supports creation as decribed in the bible and the fossil record."

That is not a fact.

 

[dad]

I can deny the "record" you speak of because you haven't demonstrated it to be true.

It is demonstrated enough to billions of people. You can only deny history or Scripture from a standpoint of ignorance. Not with science.

The evidence we have from multiple fields of science show that man and animals were NOT "created about the same time."

Not true. Only your baseless same nature in the past BELIEF placed on evidence suggests this to your biased mind. Not any evidence. Not any science. Not any fact. Not any history. Not any reality. Not any proof.
Cease and desist from peddling your religion as something other than what it is.

Human beings are in the fossil record, so I don't know what you are talking about.

Since I have repeatedly stated that I suspect the flood was somewhere around the KT layer, your argument is a strawman. Irrelevant. Of course after the present nature came to exist people and animals started joining the fossil record. This is news?
So, yes, of course most animals and man are not in the early record and could not leave fossil remains or other remains until the present nature started to exist.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Burden of proof is a concept that completely eludes you.
Carry on with your fantasies. You're "argumentation" is on the same level as Kent Hovind, which is to say, pretty, pretty low.

I'm out.

 

[Bear Wild]

Burden of proof is a concept that completely eludes you.
Carry on with your fantasies. You're "argumentation" is on the same level as Kent Hovind, which is to say, pretty, pretty low.

I'm out.

Dads imagination is beyond limits. Impossible to discuss anything of science with someone with such magical thinking. So even though your posts are well thought out with logic and evidence they have no meaning to dad.

 

[dad]

Dads imagination is beyond limits. Impossible to discuss anything of science with someone with such magical thinking. So even though your posts are well thought out with logic and evidence they have no meaning to dad.

Logic is to have a reason for denial. Science has no reason for a same nature in the past, therefore denying the bible record of the past and history is illogical. No matter how you wish for it, or believe in it, it is not logical unless supported. Using your belief in a certain nature in the past to explain the past is not supporting the belief. Nor is it evidence. The evidence need not come with the parasites of your belief system. (we know you consider anything else magical)

 

[YoursTrue]

Well this is the problem. I believe many of these "professed Christians" run with athiest groups that do not believe the scriptures and attack the scriptures and when asked if they believe the scriptures you will never get a direct answer. Yet we know that for a "christian" we are saved by faith in God's Word. The same people seek to teach against this very same word when it is only through the Word of God that we have salvation. I believe the scriptures teach without faith it is impossible to please God and whatsoever is not of faith is sin. Now if faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. How can you have faith when there is no Word. I believe this is the fruit of "unbelievers" not "christians" according to the scriptures. Do away with the scriptures they say and profess "christianity". Yet it is by their fruits we are told you will know them. That is those who are "chrisitian" and those who are not.

Thanks for trying to help.

It's been an interesting journey here, I must say, thanks for your voice. Yes, by their fruits shall you know them. I remember when I was in high school, not a reader of the Bible in particular, not understanding (but I was an honor student, so I got good grades), and I rather innocently asked my history teacher why people went to war. (I couldn't really understand it, and as I continue my education, history becomes rather fascinating.) He said, and I believe he was quite bright, "Sometimes they have to, and sometimes it's necessary to reduce the population." Reduce the population, I thought? What?? Anyway -- yes, by their fruits shall you know them. Thanks. At last I follow Christ, thank God for that.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Not like I would expect you to be able to confirm or deny inspiration.

That reminds me, one trick of evos (and Satan) is to accuse others of what they themselves are guilty of.
It may be hard to face, but you have failed repeatedly to support the same nature in the past that you fanatically insist on using in modeling the past. That makes any claims based on this a denial of anything beyond the recent past.
Shoe, meet foot.

Try to get a grip. What posters have suggested is that most scientists in origins fields would not be knowingly involved. (like useful idiots). Like actors, they more or less just memorize the lines given to them. I happen to know the writer.

Your problem with choosing to believe lies on your end. Since you do not believe God, Scripture, the apostles, or prophets or history, or Believers, I would be quite concerned if you believed me.

I love how he, instead of actually reflecting on the points put to him which expose his fallacious reasoning, he actually simply doubles down on the already exposed fallacies and even adds some extra stinky sauce on top.



Well... no, actually, I don't really love it. It's quite sad.
But it sure is entertaining to see though...

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I am quite sure many profess belief but really negate that claim by saying that Jesus believed an allegory but spoke it as if it were true. And of course, you claim you believe in Christ, but so far I haven't seen you say you believe the lineage as written about him. How could you believe in the gospel accounts of his lineage if you think the account of Adam and Eve are myths? I mean what makes you think you are a Christian? So far silence on your part about that. The only answer I glean from you is that you just like what you think you like about Jesus but deny the truth of what he said. Ok. I understand, thanks for the conversation.

So you are going to judge me based on missing a question within your interrogation, your own bias, ignorance and bigotry? Is your idea of Christianity to drive other Christians from God? To show your own greatness by beating down and persecuting your fellow Christians over a difference in doctrine? That seems like the promotion of hatred and sin rather than the message of Christ. But you two be the Christians you feel you have to be. I am looking to a better example.

 

[dad]

I love how he, instead of actually reflecting on the points put to him...

How can we reflect on your supporting your belief in a same nature in the past when you have not done so?
How can anyone expect you to accept history and Scripture records as evidence when you wave them away and are in denial for no reason?
How could you expect anyone to support any nature in the past with science when they cannot deny or confirm or support either a same or different nature?
Focus.

 

[YoursTrue]

I do not think you understand. It is not even clear that you read all of what I posted. I am sure I do not meet your measure of Christianity, but I am not as true a Christian as you must be and did not know I had to pass your judgement.

.
Of course my judgement is not the rule of God. Jesus said of Creation “Moses wrote this commandment for you because of your hardness of heart. 6However, from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’" Was Jesus, in your opinion, telling the truth? Since you say you're a Christian, how does the man you say you have faith in add up to your beliefs in evolution? I'm sorry if you don't like this line of questioning but putting 1 and 1 side by side (evolution and Jesus Christ), how does it work in your estimate? Does Jesus, the one you say you profess faith in, promote evolution as to how humans came about? Or I give you some room, did he just leave out a few details about them emerging from ancestors of the unknown last common ancestor? Your thoughts about this. There's more about what Jesus said, and I thank you for the opportunity to explore this.

 

[YoursTrue]

So you are going to judge me based on missing a question within your interrogation, your own bias, ignorance and bigotry? Is your idea of Christianity to drive other Christians from God? To show your own greatness by beating down and persecuting your fellow Christians over a difference in doctrine? That seems like the promotion of hatred and sin rather than the message of Christ. But you two be the Christians you feel you have to be. I am looking to a better example.

You talk about the message of Christ. Do you believe he told the truth as to his beliefs? Part of his message was that God created the man and woman. Another part of his message was about Noah.

 

[Bear Wild]

You talk about the message of Christ. Do you believe he told the truth as to his beliefs? Part of his message was that God created the man and woman. Another part of his message was about Noah.

Dan can talk about the message of Christ because that is his belief. I respect it, so should you even though you see do not see it the same way. As far as I have ever read Jesus never commented directly on Noah. If you can point to the actual writhing's of Jesus when he said anything about Noah I would love to see it. If you can even site any writings of Jesus that made it clear that Jesus himself stated that god created man and woman then produce it. If not then it is all interpretation/belief. For all we know Jesus saw the creation story as metaphor symbolic of his Jewish faith.

 

[YoursTrue]

So you are going to judge me based on missing a question within your interrogation, your own bias, ignorance and bigotry? Is your idea of Christianity to drive other Christians from God? To show your own greatness by beating down and persecuting your fellow Christians over a difference in doctrine? That seems like the promotion of hatred and sin rather than the message of Christ. But you two be the Christians you feel you have to be. I am looking to a better example.

Here's a better example. The Bible gives Jesus genealogy straight down to Adam. Do you think maybe it meant Adam was first the homo sapien that evolved from an

So you are going to judge me based on missing a question within your interrogation, your own bias, ignorance and bigotry? Is your idea of Christianity to drive other Christians from God? To show your own greatness by beating down and persecuting your fellow Christians over a difference in doctrine? That seems like the promotion of hatred and sin rather than the message of Christ. But you two be the Christians you feel you have to be. I am looking to a better example.

How is this judging you? You say you are a Christian and you believe in evolution, so...how do you relegate the idea that Jesus spoke of Noah? Again...maybe do you think he was misled because evolution was not something he was taught? I'm giving you a break here to help you about Christianity since you say you are a Christian.

So you are going to judge me based on missing a question within your interrogation, your own bias, ignorance and bigotry? Is your idea of Christianity to drive other Christians from God? To show your own greatness by beating down and persecuting your fellow Christians over a difference in doctrine? That seems like the promotion of hatred and sin rather than the message of Christ. But you two be the Christians you feel you have to be. I am looking to a better example.

Dan can talk about the message of Christ because that is his belief. I respect it, so should you even though you see do not see it the same way. As far as I have ever read Jesus never commented directly on Noah. If you can point to the actual writhing's of Jesus when he said anything about Noah I would love to see it. If you can even site any writings of Jesus that made it clear that Jesus himself stated that god created man and woman then produce it. If not then it is all interpretation/belief. For all we know Jesus saw the creation story as metaphor symbolic of his Jewish faith.

Perhaps Dan believes that too. Maybe you might think Jesus didn't get explicit when he spoke of the flood of Noah or God creating male and female. Maybe you think when he spike about these things he e meant them as...metaphors and fables or allegories. Yes, he spoke of Noah rather pointedly. You might want to check out Jesus'words. New International Version
'As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man."

 

[YoursTrue]

Dan can talk about the message of Christ because that is his belief. I respect it, so should you even though you see do not see it the same way. As far as I have ever read Jesus never commented directly on Noah. If you can point to the actual writhing's of Jesus when he said anything about Noah I would love to see it. If you can even site any writings of Jesus that made it clear that Jesus himself stated that god created man and woman then produce it. If not then it is all interpretation/belief. For all we know Jesus saw the creation story as metaphor symbolic of his Jewish faith.

My concern is not about Dan, but rather the contrast between what the Bible says and what the theory of evolution claims to be. Obviously anyone is free to believe whatever he wants to. My question is about a professed belief in Jesus, and then declaring that evolution is true This is not judging but inquiring.
Again, here's what Jesus wrote about history:
New International Version
"If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me." So you conclude.

 

[YoursTrue]

Dan can talk about the message of Christ because that is his belief. I respect it, so should you even though you see do not see it the same way. As far as I have ever read Jesus never commented directly on Noah. If you can point to the actual writhing's of Jesus when he said anything about Noah I would love to see it. If you can even site any writings of Jesus that made it clear that Jesus himself stated that god created man and woman then produce it. If not then it is all interpretation/belief. For all we know Jesus saw the creation story as metaphor symbolic of his Jewish faith.

Symbolic of his Jewish faith?? You mean maybe he thought God didn't really create male and female but he was only saying what the Bible said, while really believing and thinking it was a myth or fable about God creating male and female? Or maybe you and Dan think that Jesus didn't really know but spoke about Jewish fables as true enough with regard to creation, as well as Noah. Look, if you and Dan believe that, that's what you believe. There are lots of beliefs in this world even if some don't corroborate the other.