How Does the Existence of God Negate Darwinian Evolution?

[TagliatelliMonster]

Christian nations don't punish gay people.

Funny.


Give an example of a "christian nation". ie: a theocracy where the bible is the law.

Do such nations still exist today? I don't think so.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Subspecies of X are not a different type of being from X. It's impossible for mammals to produce non mammals.

You have successfully repeated what I just said.

That is indeed what evolution theory predicts: mammals will produce mammals and subspecies of mammals.

If mammals would produce non-mammals, evolution would be falsified.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Wow! You still miss the obvious. The theory of evolution says that mammals will only produce mammals. You are trying to create a strawman version of evolution. Once again, there is no change of kinds in evolution.

You share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. That ancestor was an ape. The chimpanzee is an ape, you are an ape. No change of kinds.

You share a common ancestor with dogs. That common ancestor was a mammal. The dog is a mammal. You are a mammal. No change of kind.

You share a common ancestor with crocodiles. That common ancestor was a tetrapod. The crocodile is a tetrapod, you are a tetrapod. No change of kind.

I could go on.

Amazing, right?
I'm 110% positive that there will be posts by @Skywalker after this, where he will still try to argue against evolution by arguing that same strawman.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The Old Testament gives the death penalty for kidnapping. Bible Gateway passage: Exodus 21:16-18 - Contemporary English Version

Buying a slave, is a business transaction. Not a kidnapping.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What Christians in the past punished gay people?

What planet do you live on?
Are you seriously that ignorant about what goes on around you?

Go ask a gay person in the bible belt how it is to be gay in the bible belt.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Legalizing something is different from not making something illegal.

No, it's is the exact same.
It is saying that the practice is okay, allowed and not to be punished or considered a crime.

Something that isn't made illegal is more likely to be a non issue, to those in authority.

Exactly. Slavery in the bible, is a non-issue.

Evil, evil book.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How can theistic evolution be true? God wouldn't need to use evolution to create everything. God does all things decently and in order and created all things for his pleasure.

So he created nasty parasites that incubate inside people's eyes and eat those eyes from the inside out, "for his pleasure"?

Nasty!

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Milk has a function associated with giving life.

So does any food source.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If you believe in God, God creating everything is sufficient to explain what we see in nature.

Bare claims of magic, aren't explanations of anything. They have zero explanatory power.

"god dun it" has the exact same explanatory power as "interdimensional pixies dun it". Which is to say: no such explanatory power at all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How much out of their kind can they produce?

Not at all.

It's the law of monophy: creatures can not and will not outgrow their ancestry.

All descendants of mammals will be mammals or subspecies thereof (which would still be mammals).

How many times must it be repeated?

 

[McBell]

So he created nasty parasites that incubate inside people's eyes and eat those eyes from the inside out, "for his pleasure"?

Nasty!

Wait, I thought she said that those were the fault of mans fall?
That man is as powerful as God.

Or something like that...

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There were hundreds of other issues to mention and a limited amount of space.

As I said in the very post you are replying to, the simple sentence "you shall not keep slaves, for slavery is an abomination" takes up FAR LESS SPACE then dedicating entire chapters to regulate the practice and explaining who you can enslave for how long, how to pass them off as inheritance to your kids, how to buy them and from whom, how to beat them, how to trick your jewish slaves into becoming slaves for life and how to pierce their ears in that case and etc etc etc etc.


Your argument makes zero sense and it's obvious that you are scrambling to try and defend the undefendable.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The frame and face of humans looks different than that of apes.

The frame and face of a chimp looks different then that of the gorilla as well.

But nevertheless all gorilla's, chimps, bonobo's, oerang oetangs and humans, all have a relatively large body frame, protrusive lips, flat nails, and complex fingertips


So I ask again, and this time try not to dodge it: how do you think humans do not comply?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I don't think the people who legalised marijuana believed that it's okay.

Clearly they do, or they wouldn't have legalized it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Humans are mammals but humans are not apes because apes are humanoids.

You make zero sense.
I already gave you the criteria of "great ape". You are welcome to point out how it doesn't apply to humans.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Those same limitations is why macroevolution is against the laws of nature. Animals don't outgrow their ancestry.

Speciation is macro evolution.

Speciation is when a species produces a subspecies.

Macro evolution is not a violationg of the law of monophy.

Please inform yourself on the theory you are so hellbend on arguing against, before trying to argue against it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Genes and organs are made up of atoms but it's different because it's biological.

You make zero sense.
The hydrogen, carbon, etc atoms you find biological creatures are the exact same atoms you find in anything else.

There's no evidence that such complexity can develop in nature, even in a lab.

Well, if you ignore all the evidence, then yes, there is no evidence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What lab evidence is there that such complexity could develop without God?

Any evolution experiment will do.

What evidence is there, btw, that such complexity could develop WITH a god? What evidence is there that there even is such a thing as gods?

Laws show speciation, or variations within plants, but none of those change or have ever changed kinds.

How many times must it pointed out to you that evolution isn't compatible with what you call a "change in kinds"?

If a "change in kind" would occur (ie: mammals speciating into NON-mammals), then evolution would be disproven.

Seriously, how many more times must it be repeated? When are you finally going to let go of this strawman?

Again I have to ask: if you are so certain that evolution is false, then why can you only argue against it by arguing strawmen?

DNA that developed in labs was stagnant.

By all means, cite the paper that details this lab experiment.
I predict that you won't because you just stucked that out of your thumb
I also predict that if you link a paper, it will not at all say what you claim it says (just like was the case with just about all links your provided till now).

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The universe is more complex than a can of Coke, yet people are content to believe that it just came out of nowhere-that something came from nothing. But if a Coke can and it's contents couldn't happen by random chance processes, how could something as orderly and intricately designed as our universe have been assembled merely by chance? Logically we know that's impossible.

Complexity is not evidence of design.

To say it is, is an argument from ignorance / incredulity / awe.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Isn't believing that there is no Creator believing that the universe came out of nowhere?

No. That's just the false dichotomy that you have set up.

As I already told you, you can only argue "for" your religious case and "against" science, by making fallacious arguments while misrepresenting said science.

The universe is not eternal

You don't know that. You just believe that.

. Where did it come from?

We don't know. Neither do you.