Humans did NOT evolve from the common ancestor of Apes

[Sonofason]

More trolling? Interesting choice.

Interesting, I answer a question and you are at liberty to call it trolling. I respond to the false accusation and you call it trolling. Have a good day sir. I prefer honest debate.

 

[Aman777]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aman777
Dear sojourner, All that I can do is list the text and tell you what it says to me. IF you don't agree, then list your text which refutes me. You cannot seem to do that so you nit pick and whine and claim that YOUR altered and paraphrased bible doesn't say the same as my KJV. Whooptedoo. Unless you have something to actually offer, I will ignore your twisted and completely distorted views, since you are doing nothing but disagreeing. Have a nice Day. God Bless you.

What's twisted and distorted is the fact that you post your opinion and then don't allow anyone else to post their opinions. I posted what the bible says. you didn't Who's lying. Unless you have something to actually offer besides a very twisted and unfounded opinion of what's actually written, I shall ignore your twisted and completely distorted views, since you are doing nothing but disagreeing.

Dear sojourner, Calm down and quit calling other people Liars because they are using a Bible which allows you to trace EACH word to the original text, while your's is a Newer, altered, version, which CANNOT even show you what Day it is. That is abject Ignorance and Scriptural illiteracy if I've ever seen it. Be nice now, or the Censors will throw you off the board for Flaming. God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Yes, science is knowledge, it is a tool that can easily be used with intention.

In fact, I'll bet that where ever knowledge is employed, it is done so with motive and intention, at all times and in all places.

But we can say this about almost anything..including religion right...?

If biologist crack the genomic structure of humans as well as other primates and the findings show that we are 97 to 99% a match then what is the motive of science at this point if all it's doing is sharing information. Now you have a way to go and do test on other animals and/or biological organism and list the findings. You can then even compare those findings (i.e. DNA and other genomic findings) to ours and other primates. This can give you a base line that can help you determine ancestry. Knowledge is being shared with no malice intent.

 

[sojourner]

Interesting, I answer a question and you are at liberty to call it trolling. I respond to the false accusation and you call it trolling. Have a good day sir. I prefer honest debate.

Why would you want to kill bacteria? What is the motive for killing those poor innocent little creatures?

Is obviously a trolling statement, posted simply in order to provoke an emotional response.

You're answer reminds me of something I'd say when I've been completely humiliated.

...is also the same kind of statement.

No one really expects an answer to the questions, "why would you want to kill bacteria? What is the motive for killing those poor, innocent little creatures?" It's obvious why these bacteria need to be eradicated, and it's also obvious that they're neither "poor" nor "innocent." You asked them simply to be provocative.

Your second post is the same, because it's quite obvious I haven't been humiliated.

But please, keep trying to deflect blame and project it on others.

 

[sojourner]

Calm down

I'm quite calm. Your post, however, seems... vexed.

they are using a Bible which allows you to trace EACH word to the original text

No you're not. The KJ doesn't do that.

your's is a Newer, altered, version, which CANNOT even show you what Day it is.

Mine is a newer version with better scholarship, using more ancient texts than the KJ.

That is abject Ignorance and Scriptural illiteracy if I've ever seen it.

It certainly is on your part. Thanks for admitting your fault.

Be nice now, or the Censors will throw you off the board for Flaming.

Hmmm... Seems like your post is the one with the false implications and large, bolded type, indicating shouting.

Again: Your post seems... vexed.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

And I welcome you to apply the scientific method in order to know and experience God. Follow the procedure outlined in the Biblical text, and you will experience God. It is certainly a peer reviewed study. It is certainly independently verifiable, and that is because God exists.

Could you please provide a methodology as to how we can use the scientific method to know and experience god.

 

[Aman777]

Could you please provide a methodology as to how we can use the scientific method to know and experience god.

Dear Quaxotic, I can UNLESS you can tell us HOW ancient men of 3k years ago knew:

That we live in a Multiverse Gen 1:6-8 and Gen 2:4
That the Big Bang of our Universe was on the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4
That the FIRST Stars of our world did NOT put forth their light until the 4th Day. Gen 1:16 Humans didn't learn this until we had Space Telescopes.
That "every living creature that moves" was created and brought forth, from the water, on the 5th Day. Gen 1:21 Science agrees and shows that this happened some 3.7 Billion years ago, in man's time, from the WATER, on our planet.

God's Holy Word was written for people highly advanced in their knowledge of today's Science. Genesis is just now being understood, because Humans are currently discovering what the Supreme Intelligence of Creation wrote to us in Genesis. The traditional religious view does NOT agree with what is actually written, but instead, is the Theology of ancient men, who lived thousands of years BEFORE Science.

No man, 3k years ago could have told us the things listed above. It's evidence, which can be studied, examined, and confirmed to be the Truth in every way. God's Truth MUST agree with every other discovered Truth or it is NOT God's Truth. So examine the evidence for yourself, since Faith IS the EVIDENCE of things not seen. Heb 11:1 God Bless you.

In Love,
Aman

 

[SkepticThinker]

The difference here is that in biology as well as many other areas of science those who study these disciplines are welcomed and encouraged to apply the scientific method. So science, especially biology, does not simply provide doctrine. People are capable and encourage to test that information and if new discovery is presented that shows current finding to be incorrect or to be adjusted because of new data..science welcomes it. Faith based claims don't require such scrutiny.

This is the reason that comparison to indoctrination is a false one; scientists are encouraged to scrutinize, challenge, falsify and question each other's work.

 

[sojourner]

That we live in a Multiverse Gen 1:6-8 and Gen 2:4
That the Big Bang of our Universe was on the 3rd Day. Gen 2:4
That the FIRST Stars of our world did NOT put forth their light until the 4th Day. Gen 1:16 Humans didn't learn this until we had Space Telescopes.
That "every living creature that moves" was created and brought forth, from the water, on the 5th Day. Gen 1:21 Science agrees and shows that this happened some 3.7 Billion years ago, in man's time, from the WATER, on our planet.

Except that the bible doesn't say any of this.

Genesis is just now being understood, because Humans are currently discovering what the Supreme Intelligence of Creation wrote to us in Genesis.

It's been understood for a long time that God wrote no part of Genesis.

God's Truth MUST agree with every other discovered Truth or it is NOT God's Truth.

Guess what? It's not God's truth (fact).

Faith IS the EVIDENCE of things not seen.

"Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Not "evidence." This is why the NRSV is superior to the KJ. The KJ uses antiquated language that allows for twisted meaning. Of course, you'll refute that, because you are unable to admit when you're wrong.

 

[Sonofason]

But we can say this about almost anything..including religion right...?

If biologist crack the genomic structure of humans as well as other primates and the findings show that we are 97 to 99% a match then what is the motive of science at this point if all it's doing is sharing information. Now you have a way to go and do test on other animals and/or biological organism and list the findings. You can then even compare those findings (i.e. DNA and other genomic findings) to ours and other primates. This can give you a base line that can help you determine ancestry. Knowledge is being shared with no malice intent.

I am not denying that the evidence is there. I have not seen it. I'm sorry, but I really don't care if evolution is true or not. It doesn't affect my life whatsoever. I just don't care. I am not about to go wasting my time chasing down the truth of evolution. I don't care. I'm sorry to upset you. It is not important for me to know if evolution is true or not.

Why in the world is this so important for you that I agree with you?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I am not denying that the evidence is there. I have not seen it. I'm sorry, but I really don't care if evolution is true or not. It doesn't affect my life whatsoever. I just don't care. I am not about to go wasting my time chasing down the truth of evolution. I don't care. I'm sorry to upset you. It is not important for me to know if evolution is true or not.

Why in the world is this so important for you that I agree with you?

You've been shown plenty of evidence on this thread and others. You haven't had to "chase down" anything. So for you to say you haven't seen the evidence at this point is pretty disingenuous, wouldn't you say?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

because they are using a Bible which allows you to trace EACH word to the original text

In Love,
Aman

Aman - there is no original text.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Could you please provide a methodology as to how we can use the scientific method to know and experience god.

LSD. Lots of LSD.

 

[McBell]

I prefer honest debate.

Really?
When are you going to start?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

And I welcome you to apply the scientific method in order to know and experience God. Follow the procedure outlined in the Biblical text, and you will experience God. It is certainly a peer reviewed study. It is certainly independently verifiable, and that is because God exists.

So no faith is required.

 

[Ouroboros]

So no faith is required.

LOL!

Nice trap.


If God is a scientific fact/knowledge, the what's faith/belief for?

If faith/belief in God is necessary, then why the need to try to prove God through science or logic?

I think most religious (especially Christian) are stuck in a reductionist/scientific mindset without knowing how to do it, thinking that by somehow prove God's existence, faith would come along. But it shouldn't be that way. God should be a subjective experience. Something personal. Not something tested in a lab.

 

[McBell]

And I welcome you to apply the scientific method in order to know and experience God. Follow the procedure outlined in the Biblical text, and you will experience God. It is certainly a peer reviewed study. It is certainly independently verifiable, and that is because God exists.

You really need to define your terms.

otherwise you should have no problem with proving to everyone your claim that God exists.

 

[McBell]

LOL!

Nice trap.


If God is a scientific fact/knowledge, the what's faith/belief for?

If faith/belief in God is necessary, then why the need to try to prove God through science or logic?

I think most religious (especially Christian) are stuck in a reductionist/scientific mindset without knowing how to do it, thinking that by somehow prove God's existence, faith would come along. But it shouldn't be that way. God should be a subjective experience. Something personal. Not something tested in a lab.

I do not know that it is a trap.
I suspect that sonofason is being looser than my ex-wife with his wording.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

LOL!

Nice trap.


If God is a scientific fact/knowledge, the what's faith/belief for?

If faith/belief in God is necessary, then why the need to try to prove God through science or logic?

I think most religious (especially Christian) are stuck in a reductionist/scientific mindset without knowing how to do it, thinking that by somehow prove God's existence, faith would come along. But it shouldn't be that way. God should be a subjective experience. Something personal. Not something tested in a lab.

That's right, but it's not a trap, though. I've been teaching that for years -- faith is the only way out of Christian fundamentalism.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I am not denying that the evidence is there. I have not seen it.

You've seen and you've acknowledged it (i.e. evolution of bacteria).....

I'm sorry, but I really don't care if evolution is true or not. It doesn't affect my life whatsoever. I just don't care.

You mught not care but it has everything to do with you in your daily life...unless you're immortal.

Then again one must wonder why you're even here if you "just don't care"...?

I am not about to go wasting my time chasing down the truth of evolution. I don't care. I'm sorry to upset you. It is not important for me to know if evolution is true or not.

You're not upsetting me. Not at all......but you seem to be the one upset..I mean if this subject is not important to you then why are you here debating it?....I mean we're debating humans and apes having a common ancestor. It's a debate and if you're not willing to debate the subject with evidence then what's the purpose?

Why in the world is this so important for you that I agree with you?

It's a debate tis all. You said you've never seen evidence of evolution and I'm a person that likes to share information/knowledge to those who seem to need it....