Questions that evolutionists and billions of years proponents cannot answer but disprove their theories.

[Bthoth]

No answer from the official mouth of the evolutionists and billions of years crowd.

There are many reports of miraculous cures, especially from bad medical conditions. How do you explain them all?

Acceptance​

This view is generally accepted by major Christian churches, including the Catholic Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Episcopal Church (United States), and some other mainline Protestant denominations; virtually all Jewish denominations; and other religious groups that lack a literalist stance concerning

With this approach toward evolution, scriptural creation stories are typically interpreted as being allegorical in nature. Both Jews and Christians had considered the idea of the Genesis creation history as an allegory (rather than as an historical description) long before the development of Darwin's theory.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Acceptance​

This view is generally accepted by major Christian churches, including the Catholic Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Episcopal Church (United States), and some other mainline Protestant denominations; virtually all Jewish denominations; and other religious groups that lack a literalist stance concerning

With this approach toward evolution, scriptural creation stories are typically interpreted as being allegorical in nature. Both Jews and Christians had considered the idea of the Genesis creation history as an allegory (rather than as an historical description) long before the development of Darwin's theory.

That is some bad company.
I have noticed that any denomination that has fundamental errors and has many other errors.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Acceptance​

This view is generally accepted by major Christian churches, including the Catholic Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Episcopal Church (United States), and some other mainline Protestant denominations; virtually all Jewish denominations; and other religious groups that lack a literalist stance concerning

With this approach toward evolution, scriptural creation stories are typically interpreted as being allegorical in nature. Both Jews and Christians had considered the idea of the Genesis creation history as an allegory (rather than as an historical description) long before the development of Darwin's theory.

And don't forget the Church of England. As much as he has been going on about the KJV of the Bible at times it is a bit ironic that the only group that can honestly claim that it is their "Official Version of the Bible" accepts evolution. Oh that has to burn.

 

[F1fan]

That is some bad company.
I have noticed that any denomination that has fundamental errors and has many other errors.

Creationism is a fringe belief that isn't respected by the educated, and as you can see, the wise religious organizations. Your flimsy accusations against science are just claims, not explanations, So why would you think we would be convinced? We know better. We have seen creationists before.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is some bad company.
I have noticed that any denomination that has fundamental errors and has many other errors.

Why? Just because they do not agree with your flawed interpretation. I need to remind you that you are calling God a liar, and this applies even if the myths of Genesis are true.

It does not matter if evolution is true or not, you are still calling God a liar.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Why? Just because they do not agree with your flawed interpretation. I need to remind you that you are calling God a liar, and this applies even if the myths of Genesis are true.

It does not matter if evolution is true or not, you are still calling God a liar.

The Bible is quite clear what it says, so it is not an interpretation. They have false interpretations.
You of course being an unbeliever would not know what the Bible says.
You are a great fulfillment of dozens Biblical prophecies having fulfilled them all probably over 1 million times so far.
With just 1 million motivated believers in the lies of evolution and billions of years, that is over 30 trillion fulfillments of prophecy from the Bible with exact detail and timing.
So what the Bible says is true is true and what disagrees with it is false.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Bible is quite clear what it says, so it is not an interpretation. They have false interpretations.
You of course being an unbeliever would not know what the Bible says.
You are a great fulfillment of dozens Biblical prophecies having fulfilled them all probably over 1 million times so far.
With just 1 million motivated believers in the lies of evolution and billions of years, that is over 30 trillion fulfillments of prophecy from the Bible with exact detail and timing.
So what the Bible says is true is true and what disagrees with it is false.

Too bad that you do not understand the scientific method and scientific evidence. You could see that the flood never happened. If you insist on a literal interpretation or nothing then nothing is what you get. Your version of God does not exist.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Too bad that you do not understand the scientific method and scientific evidence. You could see that the flood never happened. If you insist on a literal interpretation or nothing then nothing is what you get. Your version of God does not exist.

You have no evidence and certainly do not use the scientific method with evolution and billions of years.
Just false circular reasoning.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You have no evidence and certainly do not use the scientific method with evolution and billions of years.
Just false circular reasoning.

If that is the case why are you so afraid? You are afraid to learn what the scientific method is. You are afraid to learn what is and what is not evidence. It looks as if you know that you are wrong.

 

[The Hammer]

Just false circular reasoning.

God fostered the creation of the Bible, the bible says God created the world, therefore the Bible is an inerrant production because it was directed by God.

How is that not Circular?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

God fostered the creation of the Bible, the bible says God created the world, therefore the Bible is an inerrant production because it was directed by God.

How is that not Circular?

Simple. the Bible makes a claim that it is the true word of God. But I have already proved that it is the true word of God with many infallible proofs. So 1 assumption already proved true.

 

[The Hammer]

Simple. the Bible makes a claim that it is the true word of God.

So 1 assumption already proved true.

So it's circular reasoning. At least your honest.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Simple. the Bible makes a claim that it is the true word of God. But I have already proved that it is the true word of God with many infallible proofs. So 1 assumption already proved true.

I see. So you are saying that the Bible is wrong. Again.

 

[McBell]

You have no evidence and certainly do not use the scientific method with evolution and billions of years.
Just false circular reasoning.

so many false accusations
in such a small space too

 

[McBell]

Simple. the Bible makes a claim that it is the true word of God.

Yes, the Bible makes a number of bold empty claims.
So what?

But I have already proved that it is the true word of God with many infallible proofs. So 1 assumption already proved true.

no, you have not.
Not even close.
All you do is repeat the same bold empty claims over and over.
It is almost as though it is yourself you are trying to convince,
Then we have the problem of you not knowing which version of the Bible you use.
So all your THE Word of God claims are less than worthless.

But you carry on as though none of this have been shown, repeatedly.

 

[McBell]

So it's circular reasoning. At least your honest.

Seems to me you assume they understand what a circular argument is.
their posts strongly indicate they do not.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Seems to me you assume they understand what a circular argument is.
their posts strongly indicate they do not.

You do not understating what an assumption is, what circular reasoning is, or science/

What was the first living creature and what features did it have?

 

[ratiocinator]

You do not understating what an assumption is, what circular reasoning is, or science

You have not shown any circularity in science. You don't seem to even understand what science is.

What was the first living creature and what features did it have?

Repeating questions that have been answered multiple times, without ever properly addressing those answers, just makes you look dim.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

There are many reports of miraculous cures

There are no confirmed miracle cures or any other kind of magic or sorcery.

The Bible is quite clear what it says

The Bible says whatever the reader brings to it and reads into its words, making it a verbal Rorschach test. Which god suits your personality best, the angry, judgmental one or the kinder one? Are its myths history or fiction to you? Take your pick according to how embarrassed you are to make mistakes that are obvious to all. Should saints be venerated? Whichever you prefer. Which day of the week shall we have the Sabbath? I think there are three answers to that.

You of course being an unbeliever would not know what the Bible says.

Only an open-minded reader can tell you what the words mean. A believer is a motivated reasoner, or rationalizer. He will tell you that the Bible confirms what he believes by faith about his god before even looking at what it says, so why even ask him?

You have no evidence and certainly do not use the scientific method with evolution and billions of years.

Is that a problem for you now? That describes your creationist position. It's interesting to see you attack the positions of others with challenges you can't meet yourself.

the Bible makes a claim that it is the true word of God.

That's only half of the circular "argument." The other half is "The Bible is believable because God wrote it" :

You are a great fulfillment of dozens Biblical prophecies

Biblical prophesies not even as good as mine about your posting, which is that you will continue reposting the same tired, irrelevant, previously rebutted apologetics that reveal how little you know about science and critical thought, and how you can't pass the tests you give others. I've been specific about time and place (your every RF post this week and henceforth until you no longer post), so it should be easy to confirm. Let's see how I did:

What was the first living creature and what features did it have?

So let it be written, so let it be done! IANS prophecy fulfilled again as it has been so many times in the past. Look at how many times in the last 24 hours:

How did the citrus cycle evolve?

You've made this error at least three times. Like everything else in biological systems, the citric acid (Krebs) cycle evolved by the application of natural selection to genetic variation resulting in the elaboration of the necessary proteins.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

There are no confirmed miracle cures or any other kind of magic or sorcery.

The Bible says whatever the reader brings to it and reads into its words, making it a verbal Rorschach test. Which god suits your personality best, the angry, judgmental one or the kinder one? Are its myths history or fiction to you? Take your pick according to how embarrassed you are to make mistakes that are obvious to all. Should saints be venerated? Whichever you prefer. Which day of the week shall we have the Sabbath? I think there are three answers to that.

Only an open-minded reader can tell you what the words mean. A believer is a motivated reasoner, or rationalizer. He will tell you that the Bible confirms what he believes by faith about his god before even looking at what it says, so why even ask him?

Is that a problem for you now? That describes your creationist position. It's interesting to see you attack the positions of others with challenges you can't meet yourself.

That's only half of the circular "argument." The other half is "The Bible is believable because God wrote it" :

View attachment 83500

Biblical prophesies not even as good as mine about your posting, which is that you will continue reposting the same tired, irrelevant, previously rebutted apologetics that reveal how little you know about science and critical thought, and how you can't pass the tests you give others. I've been specific about time and place (your every RF post this week and henceforth until you no longer post), so it should be easy to confirm. Let's see how I did:

So let it be written, so let it be done! IANS prophecy fulfilled again as it has been so many times in the past. Look at how many times in the last 24 hours:

View attachment 83501

You've made this error at least three times. Like everything else in biological systems, the citric acid (Krebs) cycle evolved by the application of natural selection to genetic variation resulting in the elaboration of the necessary proteins.

I only have one assumption, that the Bible is the true word of God And I have already proved it with many infallible proofs.

You have a multitude of already proven false assumptions.

Here is your circular reasoning and unscientific methods.

Because the citrus cycle exist, it must have evolved by natural processes.
Now deny all facts, science that show the absurdity of this assumption.
Then repeat the same fully logic for everything in creation.