Humans did NOT evolve from the common ancestor of Apes

[angellous_evangellous]

No sir, my mind is perfect.

Perfect dissonance.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Der Sonofason, The conflict is what is added to the ToE by those who force their views upon our children. Evols falsely teach that Humans evolved from the common ancestor of Apes and THAT is the problem.

How so...We've shown you all the evidence...be it genetic or visual (i.e. fossil and/or skeletal) similarities. We've even shared the social science with you.

See it's easy to claim victory if you ignore the evidence then drop the mic, walk off stage with your fingers in your ears screaming ("lah, lah, lah lah...you're wrong, your wrong...!!!....:ignore:") without actually addressing the evidence.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You don't know that evolution is true, yet you drill that BS into the minds of little children to believe it, inevitably in order to cause them to reject God, and cause their eternal damnation.

The rejection of God is not the purpose of evolution, but to understand how nature works. The people who reject God because of belief in evolution do so because of the corrupt theology that people like you indoctrinate them with.

This is also why seminarians reject God -- once they learn that their churches have lied to them about the NT so much -- the seminarians must make the awful choice between the truth and the church --- or whether or not they will propagate the church's lies.

It doesn't need to be this way. Dealing with the world truthfully gives the Christian faith substance and power -- allowing Christianity to dictate the facts forces us to deal with the world dishonestly.

 

[Sonofason]

How so...We've shown you all the evidence...be it genetic or visual (i.e. fossil and/or skeletal) similarities. We've even shared the social science with you.

See it's easy to claim victory if you ignore the evidence then drop the mic, walk off stage with your fingers in your ears screaming ("lah, lah, lah lah...you're wrong, your wrong...!!!....:ignore:") without actually addressing the evidence.

You haven't provided any evidence. You haven't seen any evidence. You are brainwashed. You never will see evidence. So don't try to say I've ignored what you failed to provide. That is very dishonest.

 

[Sonofason]

The rejection of God is not the purpose of evolution, but to understand how nature works. The people who reject God because of belief in evolution do so because of the corrupt theology that people like you indoctrinate them with.

This is also why seminarians reject God -- once they learn that their churches have lied to them about the NT so much -- the seminarians must make the awful choice between the truth and the church --- or whether or not they will propagate the church's lies.

It doesn't need to be this way. Dealing with the world truthfully gives the Christian faith substance and power -- allowing Christianity to dictate the facts forces us to deal with the world dishonestly.

I know it's hard for you, but the Bible is completely true. Why don't you understand it? Don't you claim to be a Christian? For God's sake, be one.

 

[allfoak]

I know it's hard for you, but the Bible is completely true. Why don't you understand it? Don't you claim to be a Christian? For God's sake, be one.

 

[Thief]

The rejection of God is not the purpose of evolution, but to understand how nature works. The people who reject God because of belief in evolution do so because of the corrupt theology that people like you indoctrinate them with.

This is also why seminarians reject God -- once they learn that their churches have lied to them about the NT so much -- the seminarians must make the awful choice between the truth and the church --- or whether or not they will propagate the church's lies.

It doesn't need to be this way. Dealing with the world truthfully gives the Christian faith substance and power -- allowing Christianity to dictate the facts forces us to deal with the world dishonestly.

I can relate to this personally.
When I was soooooooooo much younger, I made a bid on a possible position.

There are at least two other people holier than me.
Go figure.

But just as well, as my continued reading of the gospels lead me to know the collar would have been impossible to wear.

As for Genesis, however...it's good stuff as is.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I know it's hard for you, but the Bible is completely true. Why don't you understand it? Don't you claim to be a Christian? For God's sake, be one.

If you need to live in a world of lies in order to sustain your theology, chances are -- just possibly -- that theology isn't as sacred as you thought.

 

[Thief]

How Creationists Argue (by analogy)

1) Evolutionist argument: Let me tell you how a car is made.

2) Creationist rebuttal: Tacos!

3) Evolutionist (confused): No, I was talking about cars.

4) Creationist: Motorcycles are so complex they must have a Creator.

5) Evolutionist: Yes, Harley Davidson has an efficient factory.

6) Creationist: Bananas fit in my hand, so I'm right about God.

7) Evolutionist: ??? Well, bananas fit it my hand, too, so does that make me right.

8) Creationist: No, you're going to hell so bananas don't matter.

9) Evolutionist: Sigh

10) Creationist: OK, so micro jelly beans I believe, but not macro beans.

If you truly hold this viewpoint of other participants.....please refrain further discussion.

Might as well talk to a brick.

 

[Thief]

If you need to live in a world of lies in order to sustain your theology, chances are -- just possibly -- that theology isn't as sacred as you thought.

Without God...evolution is not sacred.

 

[Sonofason]

If you need to live in a world of lies in order to sustain your theology, chances are -- just possibly -- that theology isn't as sacred as you thought.

Which lies exactly are you referring to?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Which lies exactly are you referring to?

1) First, the notion that Scripture must be perfect in order to be holy. Once inerrancy is accepted, a whole web of dishonest interpretations and even worse historical blunders must be established in order to make it plausible. I do apologize if I'm misunderstanding you on this point.

2) Second, and it's very clearly related to the first, all of the dishonest and irresponsible interpretations of scientific data that leads to you favor an obstinate rejection of the evidence rather than evaluating it all critically.

Now I want to make it very clear that I don't mean that you are a liar. I know that you did not come up with all of this stuff - that would make you a liar. No, I assume that you're simply gullible for falling for all of this stuff and lazy enough not to actually investigate any of this. It's also obvious to me that you didn't fabricate evidence and such - which is what creationists leaders do.

So in the scheme of things, you are more a victim of your beliefs than a villain. At least in my opinion.

 

[Skwim]

Creation start page

I've looked over his website and can't find any qualifications. The guy can barely write in English, so it's probably not an academic degree.

"Malcolm Bowden is a trustee of the Creation Science Movement and is a speaker for the organisation. He is a civil engineer (now semi-retired) and not a scientist. He has a personal web site at Counselling by the Bible, Creation, Charismatic errors, Essays by Malcolm Bowden.. He is an out and out creationist but as creationists go has some weird ideas such as the earth is at the centre of the universe."
source
​

There are no qualifications to be a creationist, although it does help to be a bit thick in the head.

 

[Sonofason]

1) First, the notion that Scripture must be perfect in order to be holy. Once inerrancy is accepted, a whole web of dishonest interpretations and even worse historical blunders must be established in order to make it plausible. I do apologize if I'm misunderstanding you on this point.

2) Second, and it's very clearly related to the first, all of the dishonest and irresponsible interpretations of scientific data that leads to you favor an obstinate rejection of the evidence rather than evaluating it all critically.

Now I want to make it very clear that I don't mean that you are a liar. I know that you did not come up with all of this stuff - that would make you a liar. No, I assume that you're simply gullible for falling for all of this stuff and lazy enough not to actually investigate any of this. It's also obvious to me that you didn't fabricate evidence and such - which is what creationists leaders do.

So in the scheme of things, you are more a victim of your beliefs than a villain. At least in my opinion.

But then of course, you have never investigated this stuff for yourself, have you? Please, don't say yes. I already know you haven't. If you had, you'd be searching for the truth, like I am.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

If you truly hold this viewpoint of other participants.....please refrain further discussion.

Might as well talk to a brick.

My opinion of creationism is far lower, my friend.

I have to deal with these bozos in real life and they do their best to make my life miserable. They can eat **** and die.

That is - leaders, not followers.

 

[Skwim]

I know it's hard for you, but the Bible is completely true.

So both of these are true, are they!

1KI 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.


2CH 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen;
​

Obviously your definition of true doesn't come anywhere close to any dictionary definition. But that's okay. Continue to make it up as you go along. You;re certainly not fooling anyone here.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

But then of course, you have never investigated this stuff for yourself, have you? Please, don't say yes. I already know you haven't. If you had, you'd be searching for the truth, like I am.

Don't assume that if someone has come to the same conclusions as you after having studied the evidence that they are as intellectually and spiritually immature as you are.

Now your beliefs seriously impede your ability to interact with truth - because you've already found all the truth in Scripture (and your ineffectual interpretations of it). That is, if something doesn't support your view of Scripture, you will reject it in favor of something that does, no matter how silly that favored alternative is.

Don't mistake me for caring about any of this - I only care about your beliefs inasmuch as they affect me. That is, I teach graduate and undergraduate students who have to struggle with their faith in light of *very* basic learning about the New Testament or rudimentary science. I hate to see people deny their faith and struggle with their worldview just because they have received the most fundamental building blocks through which they can understand their world and their faith.

On the other hand, I see idiot people with no qualifications at all try and guide the theological curriculum of universities. So Christian education all over the world is still in the 16th century. Not all Christians, though. Thank God.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

inevitably in order to cause them to reject God,

Stop thinking you know why people do things. You have no idea the motivations of other people.

 

[Sonofason]

So both of these are true, are they!

1KI 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.


2CH 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen;
​

Obviously your definition of true doesn't come anywhere close to any dictionary definition. But that's okay. Continue to make it up as you go along. You;re certainly not fooling anyone here.

Lol, that's it? That's all you got? One letter missing, or one letter mis-inserted in a book that contains 783,137 words, in a book with 3,566,480 letters?

I'm going to bed.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

You have no insulted me once too many times. ESAD

NAAAW do not be sad.

ESORRY

Would a hug make you feel better?