Suppose evolution was refuted, then what?

[tumbleweed41]

What does this...

Answer: I it was only that simplistic….religion changes as its politics change and science IS the enemy of both. Religion preaches that ignorance is a rewarded and knowledge leads away from the truth and salvation. Did the men who Jesus used to preach His gospel - men who were, "uneducated and untrained men" - seek to change those characteristics, or teach others to become educated and trained? (Acts 4:13) Why did Jesus say, "I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." (Mark 10:15)
To enter Heaven you must forsake education and become mentally challenged….example : “those were not real Christians” and ‘without the spirit you can’t understand the bible”. The bible says a Christian is to kill those who will not listen to them “Kill those who are not Christian or Jewish:

You must kill those who worship another god. Exodus 22:20

Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own. Deuteronomy 13:6-10

Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. Deuteronomy 13:12-16

Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7

Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest. Deuteronomy 17:12-13

Kill any false prophets. Deuteronomy 18:20

Any city that doesn’t receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Mark 6:11

Jude reminds us that God destroys those who don’t believe in him. Jude 5



Ignorance is bliss. Christians should not practice free inquiry nor socialize with non Christians:

Don’t associate with non-Christians. Don’t receive them into your house or even exchange greeting with them. 2 John 1:10

Shun those who disagree with your religious views. Romans 16:17

Paul, knowing that their faith would crumble if subjected to free and critical inquiry, tells his followers to avoid philosophy. Colossians 2:8



Judge other religions for not following Christ:

Whoever denies “that Jesus is the Christ” is a liar and an anti-Christ. 1 John 2:22

Christians are “of God;” everyone else is wicked. 1 John 5:19

The non-Christian is “a deceiver and an anti-Christ” 2 John 1:7

Anyone who doesn’t share Paul’s beliefs has “an evil heart.” Hebrews 3:12

False Jews are members of “the synagogue of Satan.” Revelations 2:9, 3:9

...and this...

True, and being that so much evil is historical inherent of the Christian religion one would have to be following that force blindly not to openly exhibit such emotions in the first place….Facing the evil of the bible, its god and followers is supposed to be an emotional situation. And as long as his debate is not an emotional debate and doesn’t follow those kinds of reasoning fallacies (like Argumentum ad baculum)…. then all is well, wait……………….. what kind of people use the reasoning fallacy of force and or fear?????????????????? “Religious people perhaps” SMIRK…… :run:

...have to do with the subject?

 

[painted wolf]

What does this...

...and this...

...have to do with the subject?

Not a darned thing... it's proselytizing.
Not to mention fairly ignorant.

wa:do

 

[Alceste]

The fact that Christ's apostles were "unlettered and ordinary" (NWT) did not mean they were uneducated or untrained. They most certainly were literate and capable men, although without what would be a university education today.
The Apostle Paul was educated among the elite of his day, but forsook a career "on account of the excelling value of the knowledge of Christ." (Phillipians 3:8)
Throughout the Bible, the acquiring of knowledge and wisdom is encouraged.

• "All your sons will be persons taught by Jehovah, and the peace of your sons will be abundant." (Isaiah 54:13) The university-taught leaders of this world have not been able to bring abundant peace to earth, but those taught by Jehovah are peaceful.
• The knowledge of God is far superior to the supposed wisdom of this world. The Bible book of Proverbs speaks of the need to have knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. "For Jehovah himself gives wisdom; out of his mouth there are knowledge and discernment. And for the upright ones he will treasure up practical wisdom." (Proverbs 2:6,7)
• Jesus words at Mark 10:15 were not a command for ignorance. Rather, a young child displays implicit trust in his parents. Just so, a Christian will come to trust God implicitly, humbly following his commands. Paul wrote: "do not become young children in powers of understanding, but be babes as to badness; yet become full-grown in powers of understanding." (1 Corinthians 14:20)
• Finally, there are people who are "book smart" but who's lives are a shambles. The education God gives leads to life and peace. (John 17:3) Nowhere does the Bible say you must forsake education, though it does warn of "the contradictions of the falsely called "knowledge"."(1 Timothy 6:20)

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

FYI, "unlettered" means "illiterate".

The more you know.

 

[rusra02]

FYI, "unlettered" means "illiterate".

The more you know.

Regarding the word a·gram′ma·tos applied to the apostles, Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible (1905, Vol. III, p. 757) says that to a Jew “it meant one who had had no training in the Rabbinic study of Scripture.”—Compare Joh 7:14, 15; Ac 4:13 (quote from it-2 p.618)
Peter and John are both credited with writing books of the Bible. Both men were literate, and could read and write.​

 

[rusra02]

So god can put together natural and mathematical laws to create something as complex and unique as a snowflake... but not DNA?
Was DNA just too difficult for god to manage the natural and mathematical laws of?

Surely if god is mighty enough to make a snowflake naturally he should be able to make anything naturally?

wa:do

Regardless of how he created DNA, the fact remains he created it. It didn't just happen 'naturally'. After speaking of the sun, moon, wild animals, birds, and man,
Psalm 104:24 says "How many your works are, O Jehovah. All of them in wisdom you have made. The earth is full of your productions."

​

​

 

[Matthew78]

Regarding the word a·gram′ma·tos applied to the apostles, Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible (1905, Vol. III, p. 757) says that to a Jew “it meant one who had had no training in the Rabbinic study of Scripture.”—Compare Joh 7:14, 15; Ac 4:13 (quote from it-2 p.618)
Peter and John are both credited with writing books of the Bible. Both men were literate, and could read and write.​

Why is it that I am immediately suspicious of what rusra02 says regarding Greek?

 

[rusra02]

All that we see or don't see has a maker? All as in everything? You realize that would include your god, right? So who made your god? And who made that god? And that god? And that one? You just shot yourself in the foot with that one.

Give this some serious thought, rusra, and you'll realize that you're better off adopting William Lane Craig's argument that whatever begins to exist must have a cause. Otherwise, you're going to twist yourself into verbal pretzels. Not that I mind; I have been known to amuse myself with apologists who get themselves into tight spots. You cite Amos 4: 13. So what? I don't believe that "Jehovah" is real. You realize this, right?

Jehovah is the Source of all life, and as Revelation 4:11 explains:"You are worthy, Jehovah, even our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they existed and were created."
So God is unique in having no beginning nor end. As Psalm 90:2 expresses it; "Even from time indefinite to time indefinite you are God."
Your lack of belief doesn't change the facts.

​

​

​

Then why didn't he become convinced that the Bible is the word-of-God? Why didn't he come to believe everything you did? I have read from others that you're a Jehovah's Witness. Why didn't your god have Flew become a JW? It's not something you're going to be able to explain, rusra.


So, in other words, Flew was honest enough to conclude that there was a creator but dishonest in not concluding that it was Jehovah and also dishonest in not accepting Jesus as his lord and savior? If he was dishonest about the later, why do you trust his honesty about the former?

That's right! He had ulterior motives, didn't he? He was just too self-serving to accept Jesus, wasn't he? Just like me, I suppose.

Am I too self-serving to believe in Jesus as my savior, rusra? Yes or no. Am I too selfish and childish to become a JW like you? Yes or no. I'm really interested in your answer.

Many people find the evidence compelling for belief in a Creator, as Flew came to find. This does not mean they become true Christians or even profess Christianity. Faith is built on accurate knowledge, and a person must be seeking for God to find him. (Acts 17:27) Each person, including you, must decide whether they will do that or not. I don't know you and would not presume to judge you or your motives.

 

[rusra02]

It's not supposed to be... it's proselytizing.

wa:do

So taking a position contrary to the ToE orthodoxy is proselytizing? Toe the line or be EXPELLED? Where have I seen that tactic before? Oh, yeah, I remember...

 

[Matthew78]

Many people find the evidence compelling for belief in a Creator, as Flew came to find. This does not mean they become true Christians or even profess Christianity. Faith is built on accurate knowledge, and a person must be seeking for God to find him. (Acts 17:27) Each person, including you, must decide whether they will do that or not. I don't know you and would not presume to judge you or your motives.

I notice that you ignored the rest of my post and didn't respond to anything I said in rebuttal to you. As for your latest response, let me ask you why Flew didn't become a Christian? Why not? How could the evidence for a Creator be that compelling and yet the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus or for the divine inspiration of the Bible be less compelling? The evidence, any evidence, for the resurrection of Christ should be much stronger than the evidence for a Creator. Evidence for the divine inspiration of the Bible should be much more compelling than any evidence of intelligent design.

Why didn't Flew become a Christian?

As for "seeking God", I have been there and done that. No response. I'm not surprised, either. I concluded, years ago, that it was all a crock of nonsense. I was a serious seeker, too. I sincerely and desperately prayed to God for a unmistakable sign that he existed and loved me, personally. What did I get? Nothing. Zip. Zelch. Zero.

 

[camanintx]

Regardless of how he created DNA, the fact remains he created it. It didn't just happen 'naturally'. After speaking of the sun, moon, wild animals, birds, and man,

So what would have prevented God from using evolution to create DNA?

 

[shawn001]

" the fact remains he created it. It didn't just happen 'naturally'"

LOL

All things are made of subatomic particles and matter, and yes it was a natural process. Just like Nucleosynthesis which is why your body has iron and gold and carbon in it, from ancient supernova star explosions that created the elements. Even our sun is a second generation sun formed from an earlier massive sun that went supernova.

 

[McBell]

So taking a position contrary to the ToE orthodoxy is proselytizing? Toe the line or be EXPELLED? Where have I seen that tactic before? Oh, yeah, I remember...

When that position is nothing more than irrelevant preaching...

Is it that you honestly do not know the difference?

Your sad attempt at playing the martyr is, however, not the least bit surprising.

 

[McBell]

" the fact remains he created it. It didn't just happen 'naturally'"

LOL

All things are made of subatomic particles and matter, and yes it was a natural process. Just like Nucleosynthesis which is why your body has iron and gold and carbon in it, from ancient supernova star explosions that created the elements. Even our sun is a second generation sun formed from an earlier massive sun that went supernova.

Well...
Some people have difficulty distinguishing between fact and opinion.
Especially when they believe so strongly that anything they say is to be taken as though it was spoken by their chosen deity.

 

[painted wolf]

So taking a position contrary to the ToE orthodoxy is proselytizing? Toe the line or be EXPELLED? Where have I seen that tactic before? Oh, yeah, I remember...

No, the empty parroting of out of context scripture rather than genuine discussion is.

wa:do

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Regardless of how he created DNA, the fact remains he created it.

Not a fact, no matter how many times you stomp your feet.

 

[rusra02]

So what would have prevented God from using evolution to create DNA?

There is no evidence that DNA evolved (or anything else, for that matter.) To the contrary, the complexity of DNA is so great no human scientist has yet been able to 'make' DNA, nor is it likely they ever will. A prominent microbiologist stated:"The complexity of the mechanisms required for the funtioning of a living cell is so large that a simultaneous emergence by chance seems impossible." - Radu Popa.
No human alive today was present when God created the plant and animal life on earth. That evolution was not involved in creation, we have the Creator's own testimony on record in the Bible. Both plants and animals were created by God "according to their kinds." (Genesis 1:11,12,21) The available evidence supports the Genesis account.

 

[rusra02]

No, the empty parroting of out of context scripture rather than genuine discussion is.

wa:do

Right. And the ToE apologists are the judge and jury as to what genuine discussion is? If you can't refute the argument, attack the person. Or did you forget this is a Religious forum where religious views are discussed? Or is free speech only for those who agree with your views?

 

[Heathen Hammer]

No matter how many times you repeat that all, Rusra, it's still completely wrong. I realize it frightens you, but evolution is true, and its supported by all the evidence.

 

[rusra02]

No matter how many times you repeat that all, Rusra, it's still completely wrong. I realize it frightens you, but evolution is true, and its supported by all the evidence.

Well, millions of people and many scientists disagree with you. And I will agree to disagree with you also.

 

[johnhanks]

There is no evidence that DNA evolved (or anything else, for that matter.) To the contrary, the complexity of DNA is so great no human scientist has yet been able to 'make' DNA, nor is it likely they ever will...

This is simply and demonstrably untrue. Synthetic DNA has been a reality for years.