More News on the Changing Evolution Scene :-) !!! :-)

[Subduction Zone]

There is no confusion. I will only say essentially in this post what the Bible says. And the Bible says that Jesus (1) spoke of creation by God, and (2) that he healed the sick and raised the dead. AND Moses had the order of creation even as scientists get it, pretty well in hand.

Moses was fictional. And the fictional Moses got quite a bit wrong. Jesus spoke of creation, but again he often spoke poetically. The verses still work if one does not make that mistakes that you do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The reasonable test is creation itself. While microscopes can uncover many wonderful things, they do not reveal evolution of the Darwinian kind. Romans 1:20 - "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
The Bible does not say that organisms are made up of genetic quality. But it does say that God created the heavens and the earth, without going into detail as to how He did it. And reasonable minds would recognize that each day of creation could be many thousands of years long.

Nope. That is a failure. Pure circular reasoning.

A proper test has a chance of failure. And please, you cannot use a book of myths to excuse your version of God's bad behavior.

 

[tas8831]

Oh right. I forgot about quote mining. Did you just discover it? That is so sweet.

Quote mining is a fallacy that creationists have used to no success for a very long time.

Careful - this guy claims to have won a scholarship at some point!

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again -- here's the problem. Evolutionists themselves, while saying they firmly believe in the process of evolution (and I'm not defining creation for you, just as Jesus did not detail how God did it), have differences. And again -- while a person may support the concept of evolution as Darwin explained it to a degree, there is simply no proof, living or dead, WHATSOEVER, that any distinct (or indistinct) form gradually evolved into a further and slightly or greatly different form and stayed there. And as I look into the considered opinions of evolutionists about the human race and how it got here, I see again -- there is no real proof (evidence of any sort in reality) that humans evolved from some other type, kind, or species before them. No chemical or real evidence, only supposition. Now one might speculate, based on what is considered as fossil evidence, but DNA is not resolved regarding that previous types of those considered as precursors to humans came to be the present types of humans.

Why are you not defining creation? You demand that others provide you with definitions of what they mean.

The evidence for evolution exists. You have been shown some of it. You have posted articles that reference it yourself. You simply deny it and keep repeating posts like this. It is sort of funny (and very sad) reading the work of someone that hasn't got the first clue about science or biology and see that they declare that there is no evidence and all of it is speculation. Then you post straw man versions of science, now quote mining, personal attacks on others regarding their religious views and are pretty much going through the creationist denial of reality playbook.

Do you actually have anything valid to bring to the discussion?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The reasonable test is creation itself. While microscopes can uncover many wonderful things, they do not reveal evolution of the Darwinian kind. Romans 1:20 - "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
The Bible does not say that organisms are made up of genetic quality. But it does say that God created the heavens and the earth, without going into detail as to how He did it. And reasonable minds would recognize that each day of creation could be many thousands of years long.

If the evidence for your view exists, then by all means, please present it here and explain it so that the rest of us can know and understand it. We are waiting for someone, anyone to fulfill this very old claim with the support that it requires. Anyone. At all. Hello. Hello? Anybody there?

What is genetic quality, you having such a vast understanding of science to declare what you do, should be able to explain that to us science-ignorant people.

Why would a reasonable person think that a day could be thousands of years long or longer? Why all the omissions of detail? Why the ambiguity? You know the mind of God, so explain it to me.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There is no confusion. I will only say essentially in this post what the Bible says. And the Bible says that Jesus (1) spoke of creation by God, and (2) that he healed the sick and raised the dead. AND Moses had the order of creation even as scientists get it, pretty well in hand.

You say no confusion and then make posts about the confusion over the length of a day. And you know that the Bible is perfect despite having been written by numerous men that are not perfect. It must be nice up on that pedestal with all that absolute knowledge.

 

[YoursTrue]

Jesus could have been speaking poetically. He did that quite often. The people of that time were not equipped to understand evolution so why confuse them?

By the way, they weren't equipped? How? Was Darwin equipped? He concluded that humans came as a result of morphing gorillas, or shall I say, some "unknown commof ancestor," which I guess he figured must have been that way because they looked like chimps, gorillas, humans, and bonobos.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Careful - this guy claims to have won a scholarship at some point!

I know. It is an oft repeated claim that her karate is greater than ours when it comes to scholarship.

She says that she did it all by rote memorization, yet that memorization must have been erased, because even that would provide her with a much more sound basis in these discussions and it just doesn't show up.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

By the way, they weren't equipped? How? Was Darwin equipped? He concluded that humans came as a result of morphing gorillas, or shall I say, some "unknown commof ancestor," which I guess he figured must have been that way because they looked like chimps, gorillas, humans, and bonobos.

Back to the straw man evolution theory. Nice. Was it a radio-active spider? You should include that in your straw man.

 

[Subduction Zone]

By the way, they weren't equipped? How? Was Darwin equipped? He concluded that humans came as a result of morphing gorillas, or shall I say, some "unknown commof ancestor," which I guess he figured must have been that way because they looked like chimps, gorillas, humans, and bonobos.

Science is based on the work of the past. We have had over two thousand years of advancement since the myths of Genesis were written.

By the way, people do not merely look like other apes. They have the same general structures that other apes have. One can not describe other apes biologically as a class without describing human beings.

 

[YoursTrue]

If the evidence for your view exists, then by all means, please present it here and explain it so that the rest of us can know and understand it. We are waiting for someone, anyone to fulfill this very old claim with the support that it requires. Anyone. At all. Hello. Hello? Anybody there?

What is genetic quality, you having such a vast understanding of science to declare what you do, should be able to explain that to us science-ignorant people.

Why would a reasonable person think that a day could be thousands of years long or longer? Why all the omissions of detail? Why the ambiguity? You know the mind of God, so explain it to me.

I presented the evidence. And we ourselves have an accounting to God and with ourselves as to our beliefs and stand. Let's say a person says he's married but has no person he's living with, no legal papers to prove that. Let's say he says he's married and lives with a person who acclaims they are married. Let's say the papers ascertaining their marraige cannot be found. (Where is the genetic show of transference from any form such as fish to land roving animals? I won't even talk about transference of linkage in distinct form of living being to another, different form of living being.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

Back to the straw man evolution theory. Nice. Was it a radio-active spider? You should include that in your straw man.

Hey! I like radioactive spiders. Very useful critters.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I presented the evidence. And we ourselves have an accounting to God and with ourselves as to our beliefs and stand. Let's say a person says he's married but has no person he's living with, no legal papers to prove that. Let's say he says he's married and lives with a person who acclaims they are married. Let's say the papers ascertaining their marraige cannot be found. (Where is the genetic show of transference from any form such as fish to land roving animals? I won't even talk about transference of linkage in distinct form of living being to another, different form of living being.)

No, you did not produce any evidence. You posted claims.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

If I attacked you, I am sorry. It does lead to questions. And since I wonder how a person declares himself a Christian yet does not believe Jesus knew what he was talking about when he spoke of creation of man and woman, I hope you don't take that as a personal attack or insult. Just a question.

You have no way to know if a person is a Christian or not. No one does. Your questions were designed to challenge another poster on something that is not a topic of the discussion and has no bearing on the topic. The reasons or obvious for doing so and the fact that historically, creationists do it regularly when they obviously came to the argument unarmed and what they did bring has failed. It is what I have come to expect and you have not let me down.

I am a Christian. I was raised as one. I accepted Christ as my savior and was baptized probably before you were born. But God gave me intelligence and the ability to observe and reason rather than send me down a path of being a puppet that can repeat scripture without thinking.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Hey! I like radioactive spiders. Very useful critters.

They are excellent pets. Easy to find with a Geiger counter if they get lost. I am glad that digital cameras were invented though. Couldn't let the spider near any film.

 

[YoursTrue]

You say no confusion and then make posts about the confusion over the length of a day. And you know that the Bible is perfect despite having been written by numerous men that are not perfect. It must be nice up on that pedestal with all that absolute knowledge.

Good question about time. That is correct about a day's length. There certainly is difference in persons' religious take that it must mean a 24-hour day. It is clear to me, however, that each day of creation was not 24 hours long. To some, they take it that a day must mean 24 hours. I do not. The Bible itself testifies to that thought, that a 'day' can mean different periods of distinct time, not a 24-hour time period. As far as absolute knowledge (I'm sure you didn't mean to insult me, right?), only the Almighty has absolute knowledge along with his Son. Humans, gorillas, bonobos, etc., do not. Have a nice day, I hope the weather is good where you're at.

 

[YoursTrue]

You have no way to know if a person is a Christian or not. No one does. Your questions were designed to challenge another poster on something that is not a topic of the discussion and has no bearing on the topic. The reasons or obvious for doing so and the fact that historically, creationists do it regularly when they obviously came to the argument unarmed and what they did bring has failed. It is what I have come to expect and you have not let me down.

I am a Christian. I was raised as one. I accepted Christ as my savior and was baptized probably before you were born. But God gave me intelligence and the ability to observe and reason rather than send me down a path of being a puppet that can repeat scripture without thinking.

Since you say you accept Christ, do you believe that he was correct when he said God created the first man and woman? Do you believe the account in the Bible about creation? (come on...no insult intended, but you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.) Please don't be offended. I've learned from these boards about the situation of the claim of evolution. If Christ was wrong, duped, or ignorant about creation and God's role in it, how can you say he is your savior? Do you think he was duped about that, too? Still talking about creation vs the theory of evolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since you say you accept Christ, do you believe that he was correct when he said God created the first man and woman? Do you believe the account in the Bible about creation? (come on...no insult intended, but you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.) Please don't be offended. I've learned from these boards about the situation of the claim of evolution. If Christ was wrong, duped, or ignorant about creation and God's role in it, how can you say he is your savior? Do you think he was duped about that, too? Still talking about creation vs the theory of evolution.

I am betting that he gives you the same explanation that I gave to you.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Since you say you accept Christ, do you believe that he was correct when he said God created the first man and woman? Do you believe the account in the Bible about creation? (come on...no insult intended, but you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.) Please don't be offended. I've learned from these boards about the situation of the claim of evolution. If Christ was wrong, duped, or ignorant about creation and God's role in it, how can you say he is your savior? Do you think he was duped about that, too? Still talking about creation vs the theory of evolution.

Just as I was thinking to give you a reasonable response to your questions, then I read the line "you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time" and realized that this was just a slimy attempt at another personal attack with all insult intended. You are crap at this. Of course I am offended. Someone claiming to be Christian is doing their best to defame me and using coarse, low tactics with such ham hands that even a child can see it for what it is.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Good question about time. That is correct about a day's length. There certainly is difference in persons' religious take that it must mean a 24-hour day. It is clear to me, however, that each day of creation was not 24 hours long. To some, they take it that a day must mean 24 hours. I do not. The Bible itself testifies to that thought, that a 'day' can mean different periods of distinct time, not a 24-hour time period. As far as absolute knowledge (I'm sure you didn't mean to insult me, right?), only the Almighty has absolute knowledge along with his Son. Humans, gorillas, bonobos, etc., do not. Have a nice day, I hope the weather is good where you're at.

So there are things in the Bible that can be interpreted in different ways and even quotes might not mean what they say at face value? Things there that we might not fully understand and could mean even things we might have come not to agree with using lesser understanding?

I did mean to. When you take the path you have decided to take on here, do you expect the person or persons you have targeted to lay there and take it?