So what!
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Questions that evolutionists and billions of years proponents cannot answer but disprove their theories.
- Thread starter SavedByTheLord
- Start date
So what!
Please don't forget to address the questions around whether you think the earth is flat.
Meanwhile, yes, it's correct to say that at present we can't describe the path from chemistry to biochemistry to life on earth.
But if that happens ─ it's been a matter under active study since the middle of last century ─ will you admit you're wrong?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
There were no "evolutionist pagans". The concept of evolution is rather modern. You would have a very very hard time showing that there beliefs were anywhere near the same.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
That is true. But @John53 already beat me with the refutation:
So what?
What you do not seem to understand is that the source of the first life does not matter. Yes, it almost surely was natural abiogenesis. But there are other possibilities. Highly unlikely, but still they are other there. The real Christian God (which means not yours) could have even magically poofed the first cell into existence.
It's a bit of a back handed compliment because you're old and slow.
So life on earth demonstrates that abiogenesis is possible. And in my view before too long we'll work out credible means by which that happened.
Note that the bible does not begin with a single living self-reproducing cell. When it was written, there was no meaningful concept of a cell, or of an earth billions of years old. Instead there was an active belief in magic.
Me too.
I'm going to predict no as the answer to that last question.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
The Bible describes the world as a sphere which rotates on its axis and tha is how night and day occur on the Earth at different times in different places, It also says teh Earth hangs on nothing. It also shows the earth revolves around the sun in an orbit.
And there are many other advance scientific knowledge revealed in the Bible that were only discovered until recently.
So thanks for help proving the Bible is true.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, it doesn't. You need to look at the Hebrew words used. I am pretty sure that you are referring to a very Flat Earth verse.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Wrong again. And why would I look at the Hebrew . There are no originals, God got rid of them.
You saw God do this?
Where? Cite chapter and verse and quote me the passage please.
Where? Cite chapter and verse and quote me the passage please.
Where? Cite chapter and verse and quote me the passage please.
And that it is immovably fixed on its foundations, and that the sun goes round it.
Did you not read the quotes I gave you? Did you read them and fail to understand what they said?
Where? Cite chapter and verse and quote me the passage please.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Just look it up on line.
These are well known.
I backed up what I said with accurate citations and text.
Please don't make stuff up like that. It's not a pretty look.
Or is that what you think Christians ought to do, dissemble?
Yes, everything is related; everything a piece in the Big Picture, but some puzzle pieces are far enough removed from others that inferring a direct relationship is absurd.
Abiogenesis is a specialty. Evolutionary biology is a specialty. The fact that we don't yet know every detail about abiogenesis, or every step from chemical bonding to fully formed cells does not render cells miraculous and magical.
Once there was no life. Now there's life. So life occurred. The question is how,? not who?
Inferring some mechanism is reasonable. Inferring an intentional mechanic is not.
Ad absurdum:
Without the law of universal gravitation the Sun and Earth wouldn't have accreted and there would be no evolution. ∴
Newton's law of universal gravitation disproves evolution!
Without nucleosynthesis in the core of stars no iron would exist. Automotive engines need iron. ∴ Automotive engineering
proves atomic theory!
Maize is a product of selective breeding. Natural selection is selective breeding. Corn bread requires maize. ∴ Corn bread proves Darwin right!
Last edited:
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Just a simple few questions.
What caused the Big Bang?
What was there before the Big Bang?
Yet you appear a bedizened fop, so it all equals out.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
How do you explain the Cambrian explosion? In the Cambrian, all the basic body types are present but nothing before it. In the Cambrian, there are advanced creatures, with eyes, but nothing before it. In the Cambrian, there are advanced creatures like the trilobite but nothing before it. In the Cambrian, there are a bunch of other advanced features but nothing before it. These all prove evolution and billions of years false.And you appear a bedizened fop, so it all equals out.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
As I already told you, refutations of pretty much every single one of your talking points can be found here:
An Index to Creationist Claims
www.talkorigins.org
Here's the one that addresses the Cambrian explosion specifically:
In short, you've mischaracterized the Cambrian explosion. For the long answer, read the link and it's references.