Tumah
Veteran Member
Is that true?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Genesis 2
- Thread starter dgirl1986
- Start date
Is that true?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Made of a rib.....not born of woman.....a clone....'twin sister' of Adam.
outhouse
Atheistically
Thief
Rogue Theologian
outhouse
Atheistically
:biglaugh:
That is not history. It is theology written using mythology, allegory and metaphor, song and poems.
Science? please :sarcastic
Thief
Rogue Theologian
outhouse
Atheistically
Great!
Once again you bring personal opinion, and no substance or evidence or credibility.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by sincerly
Outhouse, The interpretation is guided by the understanding of the English words. That IAP statement was """there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change""".
One doesn't need a PhD nor be a scholar to understand that they admit to "details" being unanswered----either of the minor or major variety.
When One cannot answer to where matter came from to produce the "big bang", then, that "theory" remains in the "theory" category and not processed into the established "fact" one.
The same is true of the theory that life spontaneously materialized of itself from inorganic matter. Scientist have searched long and hard for the source and have not found it in the laboratory---However, it is readily found and explained in those pages of the Scriptures(Word of GOD).
Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse
You are reading it out of context. It does not address where matter came from at all
Hi outhouse, the context was the "details" which they admit to NOT HAVING. Please explain how they can claim "fact" when "details are missing----still in the "theory" stage of investigation.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse
YOU do not get to make up rules of how to interpret English
YOU have to follow the rules of the language
YOU do not get to twist the meaning to get YOUR personal desired results
I made no rules concerning the English language.
The article is clear---there is an admission of a lack of "details". That is following the rules of the English language.
Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse
This is viewed a truth for most of the educated world, and contains substantiated facts to back their position.
IAP - IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution
We agree that the following evidence-based facts about the origins and evolution of the Earth and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has never contradicted these results:
In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
Since its formation, the Earth its geology and its environments has changed under the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin.
Yes, they were educated enough to admit the lack of some very important "details", but continued with their "theory" for the existence.
Yes, it is time to get back to the topic, that IAP statement is admittedly lacking in important "details" which you nor they have NOT been able to substantiate.
outhouse
Atheistically
You dont have a clue. You are not comprehending the information as presented.
They are stating facts about the theory
You cannot even use the quote feature! let alone comprehend the statement as wrtten
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by sincerly
Yes, they were educated enough to admit the lack of some very important "details", but continued with their "theory" for the existence.
Outhouse, Please supply those "details" for the origin of the matter from which all things exist. Your IAP post acknowledges that they do NOT have the Details. Apparently, you have such material, but the IAP statement isn't it.
Also, supply the recorded proof for spontaneous formation of "Life" from any matter-organic or inorganic. Again, those "brightest" minds admit that those "details" have not been found/discovered/produced. They are still in the "theory" category.
The "quote feature" isn't the topic . And lack of comprehension seems to emanate from your end of the posting ----since, I have shown where proof is lacking in the admission of lacking "details." You keep posting the same inconclusive material. As the daily news, it will not change no matter how many times one re-runs the events.
Yes, they were educated enough to admit the lack of some very important "details", but continued with their "theory" for the existence.
You dont have a clue. You are not comprehending the information as presented.
They are stating facts about the theory
You cannot even use the quote feature! let alone comprehend the statement as wrtten
Outhouse, Please supply those "details" for the origin of the matter from which all things exist. Your IAP post acknowledges that they do NOT have the Details. Apparently, you have such material, but the IAP statement isn't it.
Also, supply the recorded proof for spontaneous formation of "Life" from any matter-organic or inorganic. Again, those "brightest" minds admit that those "details" have not been found/discovered/produced. They are still in the "theory" category.
The "quote feature" isn't the topic . And lack of comprehension seems to emanate from your end of the posting ----since, I have shown where proof is lacking in the admission of lacking "details." You keep posting the same inconclusive material. As the daily news, it will not change no matter how many times one re-runs the events.
Last edited:
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Go read Chapter Two and think science as you do so.
outhouse
Atheistically
You dont have a clue. You are not comprehending the information as presented.
They are stating facts about the theory
You cannot even use the quote feature! let alone comprehend the statement as written
outhouse
Atheistically
Go read a book on biology.
outhouse
Atheistically
Then prove it.
Prove it is not mythology. Until then it stays mythology to the rest of the world.
Because scienitifically, your god does not even exist. There is not one place in any part of nature that can be attributed to such.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
from your post of the IAP statement said:Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change,...
Originally Posted by sincerly
Also, supply the recorded proof for spontaneous formation of "Life" from any matter-organic or inorganic. Again, those "brightest" minds admit that those "details" have not been found/discovered/produced. They are still in the "theory" category.
The "quote feature" isn't the topic . And lack of comprehension seems to emanate from your end of the posting ----since, I have shown where proof is lacking in the admission of lacking "details." You keep posting the same inconclusive material. As the daily news, it will not change no matter how many times one re-runs the events.
I see your failed to supply the asked for proof. It appears that you are the one who not only doesn't have "a clue"; but like the IAP, do NOT have those necessary "details" upon which they built their house of cards.(Theories)
And Yes, they acknowledged that very important "details" were lacking. When are you planning to "comprehend" that statement subtly expressed?
Have I misquoted any portion of that Statement? In fact, I have responded to each portion, therefore, the lack of comprehension is seen in your posts.
You, apparently, do recognize what I have "quoted".
So, how about answering my questions rather than attacking me! The "quote feature" isn't the topic.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by Thief
God did it.
Outhouse, "the rest of the world" just encompasses those who disbelive. And as that IAP statement expresses, their "belief" lacked many foundational "details".
GOD gave the details of HIS Creation being Completed thousands of years ago. It isn't a changing--getting better and better--, but a deteriating world. We live longer, but still do not reach that 120 years that mankind was promised with obedience.
ALL things one sees is slowly returning to that "dust" of the earth from which "life" was given for a "time".
Please answer the questions for (primarily)the "source" initially for the material from wince (secondarily) came "life"??
Gen.1 and 2 has the answers for these questions which those "multiple scientific disciplines" are searching and do NOT have the "details".
God did it.
Outhouse, "the rest of the world" just encompasses those who disbelive. And as that IAP statement expresses, their "belief" lacked many foundational "details".
GOD gave the details of HIS Creation being Completed thousands of years ago. It isn't a changing--getting better and better--, but a deteriating world. We live longer, but still do not reach that 120 years that mankind was promised with obedience.
ALL things one sees is slowly returning to that "dust" of the earth from which "life" was given for a "time".
Please answer the questions for (primarily)the "source" initially for the material from wince (secondarily) came "life"??
Gen.1 and 2 has the answers for these questions which those "multiple scientific disciplines" are searching and do NOT have the "details".
sincerly
Well-Known Member
You dont have a clue. You are not comprehending the information as presented.
They are stating facts about the theory
You cannot even use the quote feature! let alone comprehend the statement as written
Answered as many times as you have reposted the same post
outhouse
Atheistically
Well that is not true.
many theist helped discover the facts regarding evolution, and the age of the earth.
It is you who holds a fringe position. :slap:
And you cannot debate with credibility when you cannot even figure out how he quote function works